So This is... Love?

I recently read an article in a psych journal about Love vs. Infatuation. Now, initially I didn't think it would have anything to teach me because, duh, we all know what love is. ...Don't we?

Here is how the author of the article defined "love":
Love is a dynamic process. For me, that means that there is a relationship that flexes, changes and grows as people mature; experiences happen to them, priorities and dreams are built and goals are met. Love brings out the best in people as individuals.
The relationship between them becomes the way they define their lives.
As jobs, careers, and family concerns change, people are able to work as a team--to be understanding and flexible--so the relationship (and their lives) will flourish. Dynamic process of love equals a sharing of emotion, trust, and growth of relationship. Growth is increasing ability of a couple to live symbiotically, enjoy each others company, trust each other with more secrets, depend on each other in more crises over the years, in raising children and taking care of aging relatives. It's about growing old together, and long-term investments like real estate and children.

Here is how others define "love":

(Love from a nerd perspective)
The meeting of two personalities is like the contact of two chemical substances: if there is any reaction, both are transformed. - Carl Jung

(Love from a German perspective)
Love sees Roses without Thorns - German Proverb, into English

(Love from a Japanese perspective)
He who treads the path of love walks a thousand meters as if it were only one. - Japanese Proverb

Here is how the Scriptures define "love":

"Love" = Charity
Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels, and have not charity, I am become as sounding brass, or a tinkling cymbal.
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, Mt. 17.20 ; 21.21 · Mk. 11.23 and have not charity, I am nothing.
And though I bestow all my goods to feed the poor, and though I give my body to be burned, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.
¶ Charity suffereth long, and is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, doth not behave itself unseemly, seeketh not her own, is not easily provoked, thinketh no evil; rejoiceth not in iniquity, but rejoiceth in the truth; beareth all things, believeth all things, hopeth all things, endureth all things.
¶ Charity never faileth: but whether there be prophecies, they shall fail; whether there be tongues, they shall cease; whether there be knowledge, it shall vanish away.
For we know in part, and we prophesy in part. But when that which is perfect is come, then that which is in part shall be done away. When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things. For now we see through a glass, darkly, but then face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.
And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity.

So, let's see. So far, there seems to be agreement on several items, and yet, for the most part everyone's idea of love is different, or at least they choose to rank a different trait of love higher than the others. Some concentrate on how it makes you feel, and that's how you know. Some say that you should look at the way a person behaves, and then you'll know. Countless articles and advice columns tell you to look for signs, hints, and subtle indications to know whether you're in love, or whether another person loves you. If it doesn't last, they end up calling it infatuation, because it passes and therefore was obviously not love. Well, thank you for that thrilling hindsight analysis. I'll call you the next time my car stops running, and you can tell me that it's broken.

From my experience it varies in difficulty, depending on the situation, telling whether love is real. The pragmatists will tell you that if things work out, it was. And if they don't, it wasn't. The spiritualists will tell you to ask God. And that's probably the best choice, only wait... there's this little thing called free agency that can totally muck up that answer. Regardless of whether or not you're "meant to be", someone still has to make a decision and go with it. And that's where it lies. The simplest way to tell whether or not you are in love, or not.

Love is a choice, you see. It's a verb. You either choose to love, or you don't. It is NOT an unavoidable pit into which we spontaneously fall, regardless of anything we can do to stop it, nor is it a state we can fall "into" and "out of", like a bizarre Buster Keaton act in a film noir. If you find yourself hopelessly in love with someone, it's because at some point you decided you would. And then you let yourself keep doing it, until it became a habit. And then, eventually, you do it so much that it becomes a part of who you are as a person. Love is about changing yourself through different choices, because the choice to love means that we have a new occupation. You're no longer a Doctor, or a Lawyer, or a Garbage Man who just happens to be in love, but a person who loves (or a "lover", if we must) who happens to practice medicine, argue before a judge, or drive a dump truck.

To clarify love down to it's simplest form: Love is rearranging your priorities, to put someone else at the top. It is figuring out what "love" means to another person, (whether it comes in the form of words, actions, flowers, food, time, or committment) and DOing that for them. Because love is an undefined verb with a thousand different and unique meanings, depending entirely on who you are.