Ranger19 Mar 2006

You see, the preconception I've acquired is that love, if it exists, is entirely infallible - and so it's difficult for me to think of love as being terrible. It's equally difficult for me to accept that a relationship which fails can have truly been love. Relationships which last to the grave are the closest to proof I can find. But these don't define love. I disagree with the idea that feeling love doesn't equate to defining it. I think that love (if it exists) cannot be defined linguistically, but experience is in itself a non-linguistic definition. The problem is that it can only be a definition to the recipient of that experience. Similarly, I believe that an experience - again, if such an occurrence happens - of God (particularly an ecstatic revelation) is a definition of God (or a part of God). Again, this is something which language cannot capture, nor can it be used to ferry proof to another individual. I think I do understand what you mean, but it's a proper bugger to express.

And yes, God is a great comfort at times.