plagued with questions. this must be what it feels like to be Rebecca. ;)
As Elijah pressed and snuggled his fuzzy warm face on my head, I caught myself right before I said "I love you almost as much as I love Mo-".
And I wasn't sure if I could finish that sentence. It didn't feel right to compare my affection, even if it was only between two cats, one living, and one dead.
Is love about more or less, or is love just: love. Can you love something more than you love another thing?
Would it really still be "love" in the fullest sense of the word? Though Love is hard to define...Can love be used comparatively? Can love have levels? Or would that completely destroy the essence of love itself? Why do I need to compare love? Maybe since I don't truly know what love is, I need measurements...a scale...to judge with. But is that really necessary? Can't I love without having to know what it is? Isn't every love different? You can't love everything, or everyone, the same way. Or can you? I'm confusing myself.
I interrupt this blog post to announce that I hear thunder. :)
I love thunder. But I love rain more. (am I allowed to do that? can I really love something more than another thing, and still call both "love"?)
or maybe none of it is love at all, and I've just succumbed to the meaningless frivolity of the word.
the thunder is getting louder now.
5 comments:
Darned English language, with it's messed up connotational meanings of love. [Spanish is worse though, so . . .]
I don't think it's possible to love anything in "degrees" or "levels." Because, if we could quantify love like that, it'd mean there'd have to be a limit on our capacity to love, and I don't think that's true. I think for everything we love we have a different kind of love. My love for my sister Sarah is not the same as my love for my friend Regan, nor is that love the same as my love for Nutella. Maybe you can love things in the same way, but it's still not the same love. Or, I'm truly making all this up, I'm not sure why I think any of it.
You can definitely love without knowing what it is. [That better be true for humanity, otherwise we're screwed. Even more, than we are, in our sin nature sense, yeah.]
ohohoh, and also, I freaking LOVE [mhm] this layout. It's awesome. It's my favorite I've seen thus far. Yup.
I think your right. Also, as a random side note - isn't it strange how you can love people you don't like? Or maybe it goes back to how every love is different. I suppose 'and the greatest of these is love' is for a reason. Like you said, it doesn't have limitations or measurements. It expands and stretches endlessly to fit any creature, thing, or person without boundaries. That's a happy thought.
As for the layout: hah. thanks. I felt pretty ridiculous changing it. I mean..it's just a blog. But I got sick of the darkness on the first one..and then the second one had these weird question marks on the left hand side that, as far as I know, weren't supposed to be there. :P
I feel really flattered that I was mentioned in the title of this post. Just so you know. :)
And as for the questions, I think you can love things in levels without completely destroying the essence of love.
God is love, and in that sense, love should be limitless and level-less (since His love is steadfast, everlasting, and unfailing, and I'm not sure the difference between those three words). But when humans love, we have varying degrees of how much of our love is for self, and how much is for others. So in human terms, love has levels. And just because we don't completely succeed at loving (or just because we don't know what love is) doesn't mean our love is not worth giving.
And I'm not sure if loving rain is love or not, though if it is, I'm with you.
And though explaining why I couldn't before makes me sound extremely dense, I'm so happy that I finally figured out how to post comments on here! :)
Post a Comment