I’ve Always Loved You

I know I keep posting songs on here, instead of actual written pieces, but there are just so many songs out there that remind me of Jahar. I can’t help but think about God saying the words to this song over and over to Jahar. I especially love the part that says, “Though you turn away, I’ll tell you still. Don’t you know I’ve always loved you? And I always will.”
God sings this song not just to us Christians, but especially to those that are not, including Jahar. God has always loved him, and He always will.

Advertisements

About Taylor

i'm a writer, book editor, mommy to a jack russell terrier, and a california dreamer.
Video | This entry was posted in Songs and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to I’ve Always Loved You

  1. I love the songs you post! They give me something to fill my iPod up with 🙂 And what beautiful lyrics; I believe most certainly that these are words that God would say to Jahar ❤

  2. Bri says:

    Beautiful. I pray that one day Jahar will realize just how much our God has always loved him and will always love him.

  3. ahl says:

    I am so shocked that they put Jahar’s face on the front cover of Rolling Stone magazine. They try to glamorize him and it is so wrong to call him a ‘monster’. Did you read the fury of comments from angry people who hate Jahar? Imagine waking up one day and the whole world hates you. That is what Jahar is now….the world hates him. But, this song, (thanks Taylor for posting) “I’ve Always Loved You” really pours out the grace of Jesus. Jesus will always love Jahar no matter if he was innocent or guilty and no matter if the world hates him. Jesus will never abandon Jahar. If only Jahar knew about ‘great love’ of Jesus and his saving grace, he will have peace and hope in a true friend and God who will always love him. And then he can just forget about the fury and noise from people who want him dead.

    • Bri says:

      I hate when anyone refers to Jahar as a monster. I hate that on the day of his hearing, people were talking about getting the opportunity to look into the face of evil. No matter what happened, when I look at Jahar, I don’t see a monster or the face of evil; I see a beautiful person created in the image of God, a person that God loves and desires so much. No matter how much the world hates him, the love that God has for him won’t go away. And I’m thankful too that there are people like us who love Jahar with that same unconditional love.

    • The Rolling Stone cover is definitely controversial and, in my opinion, it is way too soon after the tragedy to do something like this. I will go ahead and say that I do believe the article should have been written way on down the line and without Jahar on the cover. I do believe that is a bit much. The emotional wounds of the American people are barely even beginning to heal and this cover just ripped them open all over again. Since I cannot change the cover situation, though, I think it’s important for people to realize a couple of things.

      People are getting upset over the photo they decided to use, calling it “glam”. But it’s a selfie like we’ve all no doubt taken before (which portrays Jahar as being a human being – which he is, like it or not), and it’s one that had been used on the cover of at least one other publication not long after the bombing. I think the difference here is that the cover of Rolling Stone is a “glam” publication where “worldly idols” in the field of entertainment are supposed to reside. Having Jahar be put on the cover, an alleged terrorist, probably shatters that feeling for them and makes it easy for viewers to misplace Rolling Stone’s intentions. I think readers of the magazine forget that Rolling Stone has always focused on politics and cultural stories in all areas as well, not just music and film in America. Charles Manson, who orchestrated a string of gruesome murders (and one that killed actress Sharon Tate), was on the June 1970 cover of Rolling Stone. So…featuring someone who has been outcast to the outermost fringe of society through alleged actions is not anything new for the magazine. I personally believe Rolling Stone has stayed true to their long-term goal in journalism although I do believe it’s a bit too soon to release something like this. People think the magazine is trying to make him out to be a “rock star”, but I see nothing about the cover that “glorifies” him at all: they refrained from using his name and called him a monster. But I think people are outraged the most about the by-line released. It evokes a touch of sympathy for Jahar in which case most of the world believes he deserves none. To imply that Jahar was “failed” in any way and by anyone makes them believe the magazine is trying to elude his due responsibility in his alleged heinous acts. I don’t think they are trying to do that at all.

      I’ve read the entire article and I think it was, in fact, an astounding and well-researched piece of journalism. I think the haters need to remember that the journalist, Janet Reitman, is not attesting to his innocence at all in her piece but was instead trying to help Americans try to figure out what pushed him to go to such extremes (if he is, in fact, guilty of what he is being accused of). I find it weird that in the face of a national tragedy, people usually cry out that they don’t understand what can cause someone to become an “Eric Harris”, or a “Dylan Klebold”, or an “Adam Lanza”. People cry out for answers, want something to be done to prevent such things from ever happening again. Take away all the guns, stop bullying people, make mental health care more widely accessible, etc. But here we have a very insightful piece that sheds some light on Jahar’s life and what could have broke him down…but suddenly nobody wants to hear it. Nobody cares what could have possibly created a “Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev”. God forbid we should ever step out of our own shoes for a moment to walk in someone else’s no matter how dark the path could possibly be. Not wanting to take the time or the heart to understand others is a major part of this society’s problem.

      If Jahar is guilty, there are reasons he did what he did – which is what the article explores – but there is absolutely no justifiable excuse for the lives he took, the injuries he caused, and the terror he inflicted upon innocent by-standers. The article offered suggestions as to reasons why he acted, not excuses for his actions.

      I personally see nothing glamorous about the cover or the article. I find it devastating and when I first heard about it, I felt sick to my stomach. It still makes me sick to my stomach now. The article was extremely hard for me to read. But I take solace in remembering that the fury from all who hate Jahar is nothing compared to the fury of God’s love for him. God’s love alone outweighs all of our emotions as a collective whole by leaps and bounds. I pray as you do, ahl, that Jahar may come to know the overwhelming love, forgiveness, and friendship of Jesus.

      I really wish that Jahar could read some of the Psalms. I know that he would find a lot of himself and his own situation in them.

  4. Bri says:

    I agree with every single word of this comment.

    “God forbid we should ever step out of our own shoes for a moment to walk in someone else’s no matter how dark the path could possibly be. Not wanting to take the time or the heart to understand others is a major part of this society’s problem.”

    If Jahar and Tamerlan did do this, I wish I could’ve been there somehow to help them and try to steer them away from their dark path.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s