Yes, avoid it altogether, especially now and foreseeable future when it's heavily infested with AI bots. Only use internet for purposes of knowledge and commodity trading, i.e. gathering and sharing stuffs. Never get emotional over anything online, and avoid leaking personal information.
Look, here's the thing, what I'm trying to process is the validity of this "disenfranchised grief", i.e. griving something you expected to have but never had. In most cases it's just disappointment, your expectations were unrealistic or fictitious to begin with, such as supermodel girlfriend or millionaire boyfriend, there's a term for it called "Bovarism", named after Madame Bovary, an unhappy housewife who's daydreaming of romantic encounters all day as an escape from boring life; however, when it comes to what's considered a privation of "essential human experience", such as "touch starvation", infertility, loneliness, "nature deficit disorder" (lack of contact with plants, animals and other natural elements), fatherlessness, siblinglessness, singleness, then it is debatable on whether it's legitimate grief or just envy.That does not explain your assertion that grief is/can be the same emotion as envy, it merely explains how grief or loss could possibly lead to envy. Recognizing the loss of something precious (or the preciousness of something lost) is not even a sin to begin with.
I do not mean this in a rude or accusing way, merely an observation .....but you seem awfully eager to lable basic human-ness as sinful.
Touch has its utility in nonverbal communication. I left a barbeque today asking for hugs from each of my grandchildren when I had go to work. They let me embrace them and kiss them on the top of the head and say, "I love you." The two chatterboxes girls were silent, but I 'felt' their love in their acceptance of my affection. But, interestingly, the nonverbal one replied in his 'own' tongue that I understood in the spirit as, "I love you too," and I only became aware of his purposeful reciprocation (I'd assumed he'd also just 'let me hug' him) by his manner of the gentle release of my arms as we parted. And then the newest, littlest one, just widened his eyes and flailed at me when his mother held him up for my holy kiss, lol.
Think you are approaching all this wrong.
Nuh, there's profound nuances between envy and covetousness. If you just desire for what other people have, you can earn it yourself; what you described is covetousness, the desire to possess not just what other people have, but also to take it from them out of pure hatred, it's zero sum, and that's why it's so dangerous that it's warned in the tenth commandment.
ok well
ANd that brings up the question on human agency, it feels like there're contradicting teachings on that. In the OT there were hero after hero who struggled with all their might to deny their fate, Jacob wrestled with God all night, he wouldn't let God go until he received a blessing, which earned him the new name, Israel, which literally means "struggle with God", that that spirit of struggle is etched in the character of the whole nation of Israel, they don't take no for an answer. Then in the NT, individual human agency is diminished, followers of Christ is taught to be content with what you have and where you are, set your mind on godly things instead of worldly things, crucify your carnal desires and follow the holy spirit, and obviously nothing could be more carnal than physical, intimate touch. In this train of thought, "fate" is just another name for God's will. This is what puzzles me.
I don't think there's anything wrong with it too, a godly life is a single life devoted to God without distractions, as Paul taught in 1 Cor. 7; Jesus taught that there's no more marriage in the kingdom, Matt. 22:30, so wouldn't a taste of heaven be single life, rather than married life? It is the society that thinks everything is wrong with it, because resurrection and afterlife are ridiculous to them, just as they are to the Sadduccees, singleness and childlessness touch a sensitive part deep within the conscious, a fear of extinction, the end of your genes is the end of your whole being.
If you avoid social media altogether, who is posting these comments under the "Lovette" moniker? An internet forum IS social media.
So yeah... Welcome to the forum and all its oddball regulars. Like cinder who knows a lot about the Bible and has a disconcerting habit of saying things I would have said if she hadn't beat me to it. And seoulsearch who makes long posts about things she has been thinking about for at least three days (usually much longer) so you really do want to take the time to read them. Rod uses this forum like twitter, always very short posts but always pithy. ZNP has a thing for prophesying economic doom. And so forth.
For some reason, I thought the opening question was being asked by a man. I guess I need to work on my discernment skills.
I don't think so, we're talking about facebook, twitter, youtube, Instagram, TikTok, those sort of platforms, plus other instant messaging apps. Forum is so 2000s, it's old school.
I'm an OG from the BBS days. Forums are definitely social media.
