How's It Possible To "Love" Someone You've Never Seen Or Heard?

by minimus 28 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  keyser soze

  I love the person that invented preparation H, and I've never seen or heard them.
• 

  minimus

  well put
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  God knows when people lie.

  Who's that?
• 

  minimus

  God
• 

  VoidEater

  I neither support nor attack the implied subject of the OP; however, it's interesting that in the case of Helen Keller to note:

  Helen could not see those around her. She could not hear those around her. She had only the sense of touch to even know there was an external world in the here and now.

  The argument could be made that touch is the most ephemeral of our senses, and often (at least colloquially and perhaps parochially) we refer to other sense - primarily sight - as being something needed to validate certain events ("seeing is believing"). Often sight is the principal mechanism of measurement, and for those without sight a tranlsation of a visual measure might be made into an audible event.

  Indeed, that seems to be the backbone of the OP.

  Yet there are variations of this sense we call "touch", which might be termed "kinesthetic response". There are nerves that report on informatino from the external world to the surface of our skin; that's fairly the most general definition of "touch".

  Yet there are other nerves that report on physical events entirely within the body. This sense of "touch" can be found when internal structures contact each other, and a variation on this is the way interal "touch" is translated in our experience to allow us to sense what position various parts of our body (such as our limbs) are oriented. This is most easily demonstrated by shutting your eyes and moving your arms around - you can probably tell by an internal "touch" sense where your hands are without looking.

  Now, we also know that our emotions are based in the biochemical actions within our physical bodies - hormones are released in response to certain thoughts, for example, which creates a feedback mechanism captured by our cognitive apparatus. Thoughts of loved ones create create a cascade of chemicals that we perceive as an emotional state.

  So it's easy to see that memories, thoughts, impressions - even fantasies, daydreams, desires (not to mention digested chemicals like theobromine or designer drugs) - can indeed trigger "love", an emotional experience.

  And it might be inferred that certain interactions - electricity, magnetism, who-knows-what - can interact with our internal felt sense, our internal sense of "touch", to promote awareness of a "not-me" something.

  Helen Keller had external "touch" to tell her of "another" outside of herself. She had no sense of sight or hearing to validate this other, could not behold what they were doing without that direct contact, yet "another" did exist, and I presume she held love for some of these "others".

  Similarly, we can imagine our ideal "other" and, though visualization, fantasy, imagination, "behold" them internally withit sight or other physical manifestation.

  Once perceived in the mind - through touch, internal awareness, imagination, what have you - the experience of love is available.

  With or without reality.

  Love is always occuring within us, even if we're wrong about our understanding of a person's actions or motiviation.

  Just as we can experience apprehension, fear or concern when any number of non-real events seem to take place.
• 

  snowbird

  VoidEater.

  There is so much that goes into our being human.

  For instance, some can read about persons who died years before they came into existence and feel an instant "connection."

  When I read about, say, Ida Bell Wells Barnett or Harriet Tubman, I feel as if I "know" them - and yes, "love" them for the stand they took.

  I feel the same way toward persons of the Bible who struggled and persevered against impossible odds.

  I love God because of His hanging in there with and for us.

  Sylvia
• 

  OnTheWayOut

  God

  Which one?
• 

  freydo

  There's a word I learned from a CO at Pioneer School no less.

  pro⋅pin⋅qui⋅ty

      / pro?'p??kw?ti / Show Spelled Pronunciation [ proh- ping -kwi-tee ] Show IPA

  Use propinquity in a Sentence See web results for propinquity See images of propinquity

  –noun

  1.	nearness in place; proximity.

  2.	nearness of relation; kinship.

  3.	affinity of nature; similarity.

  4.	nearness in time.
• 

  AGuest

  Dearest Minimus, may you have peace!

  As beings of flesh, we can express or discern love... or a manner of love... using any one of our five senses. But this isn't complete: TRUE love is NOT expressed by the flesh... but by the SPIRIT. By the "man" you are on the INSIDE.

  Thus, Helen Keller, although unable to see or hear her mother/father, et al. with her eyes and ears of FLESH... used the eyes and ears of her SPIRIT to "see" them. And, thus, it would have been THEIR spirits that she "saw" and "heard"... and through that came to KNOW them. How so? Through their communication with and actions toward her. While we are in the flesh, we can "see" love, dear one... in other ways. For example, through one's sense of touch: a parent's gentle touch can communicate SO much more to a child than words. Through such, love can be conveyed, even without words. And if the touch is harsh, the words of "love" are nothing more than that: words. NO love is discerned by the child. ANY person can convey love to another, without seeing them with their eyes or hearing them with their ears... of flesh. Otherwise, blind and/or deaf people would be incapable of love). Our "sight," then, is not limited to our eyes (of flesh).

  And John is speaking of that: seeing one's brother with one's flesh. Not meaning just seeing someone with your eyes, literally. For of course, that is included; however, he also means someone you know OF... KNOW exists... by means of your body of flesh. Or know OF them, with a certainty, BECAUSE you've discerned them using one of your fleshly senses (i.e., YOU saw them... or YOU heard them... or you heard OF them from another, etc., and if you took the time, COULD go and see them, etc.).

  God, on the other hand, you do NOT see with your body of flesh; rather, HE is seen by the man that you are on the INSIDE of that flesh. So, you cannot take John's words "God, whom you have NOT seen," to mean not seen at all. Because we CAN see God... by SEEING Christ. But you cannot see or hear either of them... with the eyes and ears of your FLESH. For they are SPIRITS... and so must be seen and hear by YOUR spirit... the "man" you are... on the INSIDE.

  And so, you cannot be loving God... who you cannot/have not discerned with your body of flesh... and be hating your brother who you HAVE/CAN discern(ed) with your body of flesh.

  Because (and this is for members of the Body of Christ, to whom John was writing - may you all have peace!)... that IS the body that you temporarily "reside" in... NOW. It is where you TABERNACLE with God... the place where He temporarily dwells in you... while awaiting to put on the TRUE "temple" of God... the body of spirit... which body is received when our Lord returns... and in which body God will ETERNALLY dwell. As a GROU. One is either resurrected to such body ("he that has died will be brought back to life")... or one is changed to such a body ("he that has not died will never die").

  I hope this helps.

  YOUR servant and a slave of Christ,

  SA