What does love mean to you?
- Thread starter Tinkerbell725
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
There are four types of love in the Bible
Agape: God's unconditional love for his children. The love we should have for God and for our brothers and sisters in Christ
Eros: Romantic love (the mushy, slushy love)
Philia: Love between friends and equals, the Love David has for Jonathan comes to mind here
Storge: Love between parents and children.
When I think of Love certain passages come to mind first and foremost how much God loves us.
Romans 5:6-8 [SUP]6 [/SUP]You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. [SUP]8 [/SUP]But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
1 John 4:71-12 [SUP]7 [/SUP]Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. [SUP]9 [/SUP]This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. [SUP]10 [/SUP]This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. [SUP]11 [/SUP]Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. [SUP]12 [/SUP]No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
Being forgiven and having a relationship with God shows us the depth of his love for us and from this outflows our love to God and others.
The other passage which shows us what love should look like is in 1 Cornithians 13
[SUP]4 [/SUP]Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. [SUP]5 [/SUP]It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. [SUP]6 [/SUP]Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. [SUP]7 [/SUP]It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. [SUP]9 [/SUP]For we know in part and we prophesy in part, [SUP]10 [/SUP]but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. [SUP]11 [/SUP]When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. [SUP]12 [/SUP]For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
Nice list of neurotransmitters. I used to work on oxytocin not in the sence of love but todo with blood vessels. Oxytocin is released during tough etc and makes you bond. It is released during labour and breast feeding and helps the mother bond with her new born child. Many women when they have given birth they feel an overwhelming feeling of love.
Agape: God's unconditional love for his children. The love we should have for God and for our brothers and sisters in Christ
Eros: Romantic love (the mushy, slushy love)
Philia: Love between friends and equals, the Love David has for Jonathan comes to mind here
Storge: Love between parents and children.
When I think of Love certain passages come to mind first and foremost how much God loves us.
Romans 5:6-8 [SUP]6 [/SUP]You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. [SUP]7 [/SUP]Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. [SUP]8 [/SUP]But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
1 John 4:71-12 [SUP]7 [/SUP]Dear friends, let us love one another, for love comes from God. Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God. [SUP]8 [/SUP]Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love. [SUP]9 [/SUP]This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him. [SUP]10 [/SUP]This is love: not that we loved God, but that he loved us and sent his Son as an atoning sacrifice for our sins. [SUP]11 [/SUP]Dear friends, since God so loved us, we also ought to love one another. [SUP]12 [/SUP]No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.
Being forgiven and having a relationship with God shows us the depth of his love for us and from this outflows our love to God and others.
The other passage which shows us what love should look like is in 1 Cornithians 13
[SUP]4 [/SUP]Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. [SUP]5 [/SUP]It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. [SUP]6 [/SUP]Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. [SUP]7 [/SUP]It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.
[SUP]8 [/SUP]Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away. [SUP]9 [/SUP]For we know in part and we prophesy in part, [SUP]10 [/SUP]but when completeness comes, what is in part disappears. [SUP]11 [/SUP]When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put the ways of childhood behind me. [SUP]12 [/SUP]For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.
[SUP]13 [/SUP]And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
Nice list of neurotransmitters. I used to work on oxytocin not in the sence of love but todo with blood vessels. Oxytocin is released during tough etc and makes you bond. It is released during labour and breast feeding and helps the mother bond with her new born child. Many women when they have given birth they feel an overwhelming feeling of love.
Thanks sister. You did well in explaining the biblical view of love. Its really amazing how love works. In so many mysterious ways. And thanks for that bonus info about oxytocin. Its the magic dust that allows the mother and child to feel the miracle that just happened at childbirth. May I know if you are you a doctor or nurse? So if its A CS section delivery no oxytocin? The mother is sleeping the whole time. Just curious. 
Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love
So this is a psychological approach to what love is. Basically, the idea is that a sustained romantic relationship would involve the meshing of INTIMACY, PASSION, and COMMITMENT.
If people just have PASSION, that quickly fades. On the other hand, some people have INTIMACY alone (I tend to call this "simpatico"). You connect and understand each other, but without passion or commitment it's not going anywhere. And, of course, if there is only COMMITMENT (I don't love my spouse and I'm not attracted to him/her anymore, but I can't divorce), this results in a very cold, artificial relationship.
If you only have two of these at work, the relationship is also incomplete (or maybe not a romantic relationship). For example, friends who have INTIMACY and COMMITMENT can have a deep friendship, but it's not the ideal for say a marital relationship.
On the other hand, if you just have attraction or PASSION and COMMITMENT (let's say you're Christians who are sexually attracted to each other and won't divorce because you think it's wrong), your love is incomplete (he calls it "fatuous") because you don't have intimacy or a true liking for that person.
What is most often called "love" by many is that combination of LIKING and PASSION. You get along with the person, and you're attracted sexually. This is ROMANTIC LOVE, but it's often not sustainable because it lacks commitment. (Many people have stories for this--"the relationship ended because we weren't ready for marriage" or "I still love this person, but they didn't want to commit" etc.)
I think there is probably some room for maneuvering amongst these ideas. For example, I can see how there might be times where a marriage is sustained by a friendship based on liking and commitment while the passion wanes a bit (through an illness, people going through grief, after a baby is born, etc.) And I can imagine how people might get married based on the combination of passion and liking, and then they deepen their commitment over time. It's most difficult for me to imagine the combination of passion and commitment. I've been attracted to men that I didn't particularly like as people (You know, one of those slightly mysterious, chemical kind of things). I just can't imagine committing to someone that I didn't like. But then again, there are those stories of people getting overwhelmed with passion who marry quickly, and then they use that combination to develop an appreciation for each other.
Btw, this triangular idea was indirectly addressed in the first episode of season six of Downton Abbey. The butler (Mr. Carson) proposed to the housekeeper (Mrs. Hughes--who is "Mrs" because of her age, not due to a previous marriage). They are both in their 50s. They've known and appreciated each other for years. They're both ready to commit. However, having been a single (and chaste) woman for so much of her life, the housekeeper feared the "passion" side of marriage--she's concerned that she's not young or attractive enough to inspire sexual interest. She proposes that they create a companionate marriage. The butler wouldn't have it. He insists that he finds the 50-something housekeeper to be absolutely beautiful and says, "I want a real marriage. A true marriage, with everything that that involves."
And let's be honest...if you've figured out how to do the single thing, why would you settle for half a loaf? Why not go for the "real marriage with everything..."
So this is a psychological approach to what love is. Basically, the idea is that a sustained romantic relationship would involve the meshing of INTIMACY, PASSION, and COMMITMENT.
If people just have PASSION, that quickly fades. On the other hand, some people have INTIMACY alone (I tend to call this "simpatico"). You connect and understand each other, but without passion or commitment it's not going anywhere. And, of course, if there is only COMMITMENT (I don't love my spouse and I'm not attracted to him/her anymore, but I can't divorce), this results in a very cold, artificial relationship.
If you only have two of these at work, the relationship is also incomplete (or maybe not a romantic relationship). For example, friends who have INTIMACY and COMMITMENT can have a deep friendship, but it's not the ideal for say a marital relationship.
On the other hand, if you just have attraction or PASSION and COMMITMENT (let's say you're Christians who are sexually attracted to each other and won't divorce because you think it's wrong), your love is incomplete (he calls it "fatuous") because you don't have intimacy or a true liking for that person.
What is most often called "love" by many is that combination of LIKING and PASSION. You get along with the person, and you're attracted sexually. This is ROMANTIC LOVE, but it's often not sustainable because it lacks commitment. (Many people have stories for this--"the relationship ended because we weren't ready for marriage" or "I still love this person, but they didn't want to commit" etc.)
I think there is probably some room for maneuvering amongst these ideas. For example, I can see how there might be times where a marriage is sustained by a friendship based on liking and commitment while the passion wanes a bit (through an illness, people going through grief, after a baby is born, etc.) And I can imagine how people might get married based on the combination of passion and liking, and then they deepen their commitment over time. It's most difficult for me to imagine the combination of passion and commitment. I've been attracted to men that I didn't particularly like as people (You know, one of those slightly mysterious, chemical kind of things). I just can't imagine committing to someone that I didn't like. But then again, there are those stories of people getting overwhelmed with passion who marry quickly, and then they use that combination to develop an appreciation for each other.
Btw, this triangular idea was indirectly addressed in the first episode of season six of Downton Abbey. The butler (Mr. Carson) proposed to the housekeeper (Mrs. Hughes--who is "Mrs" because of her age, not due to a previous marriage). They are both in their 50s. They've known and appreciated each other for years. They're both ready to commit. However, having been a single (and chaste) woman for so much of her life, the housekeeper feared the "passion" side of marriage--she's concerned that she's not young or attractive enough to inspire sexual interest. She proposes that they create a companionate marriage. The butler wouldn't have it. He insists that he finds the 50-something housekeeper to be absolutely beautiful and says, "I want a real marriage. A true marriage, with everything that that involves."
And let's be honest...if you've figured out how to do the single thing, why would you settle for half a loaf? Why not go for the "real marriage with everything..."
Sternberg's Triangular Theory of Love
So this is a psychological approach to what love is. Basically, the idea is that a sustained romantic relationship would involve the meshing of INTIMACY, PASSION, and COMMITMENT.
If people just have PASSION, that quickly fades. On the other hand, some people have INTIMACY alone (I tend to call this "simpatico"). You connect and understand each other, but without passion or commitment it's not going anywhere. And, of course, if there is only COMMITMENT (I don't love my spouse and I'm not attracted to him/her anymore, but I can't divorce), this results in a very cold, artificial relationship.
If you only have two of these at work, the relationship is also incomplete (or maybe not a romantic relationship). For example, friends who have INTIMACY and COMMITMENT can have a deep friendship, but it's not the ideal for say a marital relationship.
On the other hand, if you just have attraction or PASSION and COMMITMENT (let's say you're Christians who are sexually attracted to each other and won't divorce because you think it's wrong), your love is incomplete (he calls it "fatuous") because you don't have intimacy or a true liking for that person.
What is most often called "love" by many is that combination of LIKING and PASSION. You get along with the person, and you're attracted sexually. This is ROMANTIC LOVE, but it's often not sustainable because it lacks commitment. (Many people have stories for this--"the relationship ended because we weren't ready for marriage" or "I still love this person, but they didn't want to commit" etc.)
I think there is probably some room for maneuvering amongst these ideas. For example, I can see how there might be times where a marriage is sustained by a friendship based on liking and commitment while the passion wanes a bit (through an illness, people going through grief, after a baby is born, etc.) And I can imagine how people might get married based on the combination of passion and liking, and then they deepen their commitment over time. It's most difficult for me to imagine the combination of passion and commitment. I've been attracted to men that I didn't particularly like as people (You know, one of those slightly mysterious, chemical kind of things). I just can't imagine committing to someone that I didn't like. But then again, there are those stories of people getting overwhelmed with passion who marry quickly, and then they use that combination to develop an appreciation for each other.
Btw, this triangular idea was indirectly addressed in the first episode of season six of Downton Abbey. The butler (Mr. Carson) proposed to the housekeeper (Mrs. Hughes--who is "Mrs" because of her age, not due to a previous marriage). They are both in their 50s. They've known and appreciated each other for years. They're both ready to commit. However, having been a single (and chaste) woman for so much of her life, the housekeeper feared the "passion" side of marriage--she's concerned that she's not young or attractive enough to inspire sexual interest. She proposes that they create a companionate marriage. The butler wouldn't have it. He insists that he finds the 50-something housekeeper to be absolutely beautiful and says, "I want a real marriage. A true marriage, with everything that that involves."
And let's be honest...if you've figured out how to do the single thing, why would you settle for half a loaf? Why not go for the "real marriage with everything..."
So this is a psychological approach to what love is. Basically, the idea is that a sustained romantic relationship would involve the meshing of INTIMACY, PASSION, and COMMITMENT.
If people just have PASSION, that quickly fades. On the other hand, some people have INTIMACY alone (I tend to call this "simpatico"). You connect and understand each other, but without passion or commitment it's not going anywhere. And, of course, if there is only COMMITMENT (I don't love my spouse and I'm not attracted to him/her anymore, but I can't divorce), this results in a very cold, artificial relationship.
If you only have two of these at work, the relationship is also incomplete (or maybe not a romantic relationship). For example, friends who have INTIMACY and COMMITMENT can have a deep friendship, but it's not the ideal for say a marital relationship.
On the other hand, if you just have attraction or PASSION and COMMITMENT (let's say you're Christians who are sexually attracted to each other and won't divorce because you think it's wrong), your love is incomplete (he calls it "fatuous") because you don't have intimacy or a true liking for that person.
What is most often called "love" by many is that combination of LIKING and PASSION. You get along with the person, and you're attracted sexually. This is ROMANTIC LOVE, but it's often not sustainable because it lacks commitment. (Many people have stories for this--"the relationship ended because we weren't ready for marriage" or "I still love this person, but they didn't want to commit" etc.)
I think there is probably some room for maneuvering amongst these ideas. For example, I can see how there might be times where a marriage is sustained by a friendship based on liking and commitment while the passion wanes a bit (through an illness, people going through grief, after a baby is born, etc.) And I can imagine how people might get married based on the combination of passion and liking, and then they deepen their commitment over time. It's most difficult for me to imagine the combination of passion and commitment. I've been attracted to men that I didn't particularly like as people (You know, one of those slightly mysterious, chemical kind of things). I just can't imagine committing to someone that I didn't like. But then again, there are those stories of people getting overwhelmed with passion who marry quickly, and then they use that combination to develop an appreciation for each other.
Btw, this triangular idea was indirectly addressed in the first episode of season six of Downton Abbey. The butler (Mr. Carson) proposed to the housekeeper (Mrs. Hughes--who is "Mrs" because of her age, not due to a previous marriage). They are both in their 50s. They've known and appreciated each other for years. They're both ready to commit. However, having been a single (and chaste) woman for so much of her life, the housekeeper feared the "passion" side of marriage--she's concerned that she's not young or attractive enough to inspire sexual interest. She proposes that they create a companionate marriage. The butler wouldn't have it. He insists that he finds the 50-something housekeeper to be absolutely beautiful and says, "I want a real marriage. A true marriage, with everything that that involves."
And let's be honest...if you've figured out how to do the single thing, why would you settle for half a loaf? Why not go for the "real marriage with everything..."
I think the bottomline is that your marriage or your love story is what you make it with the help from God. It takes hard work to make it beautiful.
Well, the thing is, none of this is static. It's possible to have consummate love, but then one partner opts out of the commitment, or they stop building intimacy. I don't think that anyone just happens into this. I think it represents work for both partners. It takes work to keep the spark alive, and to maintain your fascination with another person.