John 21.16: Different words for 'love' from Christ and Peter

[Andreas Moran]

ἀγαπᾷς με


φιλῶ σε

I hadn't noticed this before - why does Christ use one word for 'love' (agapas) and Peter respond using another (philo)?

[Michael Stickles]

I hadn't noticed this before - why does Christ use one word for 'love' (agapas) and Peter respond using another (philo)?

St. John Chrysostom's 88th Homily on the Gospel of John says the following of Peter regarding this section:


Do you see how he had become better and more sober, being no more self-willed, or contradicting? For on this account he was troubled, "lest perchance I think that I love, and love not, as before when I thought and affirmed much, yet I was convicted at last." But Jesus asks him the third time, and the third time gives him the same injunction, to show at what a price He sets the care of His own sheep, and that this especially is a sign of love towards Him. And having spoken to him concerning the love towards Himself, He foretells to him the martyrdom which he should undergo, showing that He said not to Him what he said as distrusting, but as greatly trusting him; wishing besides to point out a proof of love towards Him, and to instruct us in what manner especially we ought to love Him.

Mike

[Olga]

I might add that the Greek language has three words which can all mean love, albeit with different shades of meaning: agape, eros, and philia. English, despite being the truly mongrel language that it is, is not as adept at making these distinctions.

[Andreas Moran]

So - what are shades of meaning in Christ's 'agapas' and Peter's 'philo' and why this usage?

[Michael Stickles]

The first thing to say is that the distinction usually put forth - that "agapao" is divine, spiritual love and "phileo" merely human, emotional love - doesn't really hold water in my opinion. We see "agapao" used in the NT for quite non-spiritual loves; just two examples are the Pharisees loving the upper seats in the synagogues (Luke 11:43) and Paul's lament that Demas had deserted him, having loved this world (2 Tim 4:10). On the other hand, God's love is sometimes described using "phileo", whether his love for men (John 16:27) or even for Jesus (John 5:20). You also see the words used apparently interchangeably in parallel or semi-parallel passages.

That said, from the various usages in the NT (and in the little Septuagint I've looked at), it seems to me that "phileo" is used more often in reference to a more affectionate or emotionally warmer love (it had even gained the meaning "to kiss" by that time), while "agapao" seems to refer more to the devoted inclination of the will, a heartfelt preference or choice. I think there are even a few Greek scholars who might agree with me on that :-). (actually, from what I've read they don't agree all that much with each other on this)

As a side note, the other word Olga mentioned, "eros", normally has sexual/erotic overtones, though I've read that in classical usage it was also used for love of the good or the divine ("eros" does not appear in the NT, and only once in the LXX that I know of, the words of the adulteress in Proverbs 7:18). There is a fourth word, "stergo", which means to have natural affections towards someone or something, and which appears in the NT in its negative form ("astorgos") in Romans 1:31 and 2 Tim 3:3 (the NIV renders these as "heartless" and "without love", respectively).

One other thought as it relates to this passage is that there are other things to note besides Jesus using "agapao" and Peter using "phileo":



Jesus: "Simon, son of John, do you love (agapas) me more than these?"
Peter: "Yes, Lord, You know (oidas) that I love (philo) You."
Jesus: "Simon, son of John, do you love (agapas) me?"
Peter: "Yes, Lord, You know (oidas) that I love (philo) You."
Jesus: "Simon, son of John, do you love (phileis) me?"
Peter: "Lord, You know (oidas) everything; You know (ginoskeis) that I love (philo) You."


Jesus goes from "do you love (agapas) me more than these?" to "do you love (agapas) me?" to "do you love (phileis) me?" Comparing this verse to Chrysostom's comments, it's as if Jesus is trying to draw out Peter to express the devotion that Jesus knows is in his heart, but Peter isn't willing to go that far with his betrayal still fresh in his memory. So Jesus kind of meets Peter at the point he is able to reach at that time. (As another aside - some commentators say that John was employing "agapao" and "phileo" just for variation and not to express any deeper meaning, but given this progression I tend to doubt that).

Peter's first two responses use "oidas", which means "know" but literally renders as "you have seen" (nifty idiom there); but when Jesus asks the third time, he uses "ginoskeis", which means "to understand, perceive, know" (this is also the word used in Jewish idiom for sexual intercourse). The Scripture says Peter was grieved when Jesus asked the third time "do you love (phileis) me?" - the same type of love Peter had already told Jesus He had seen in him - so Peter bumps up "know" to a stronger term, effectively saying "Lord, you've not only seen it, you know it".

After this, Jesus shows Peter the death he will suffer. Jesus is saying in a way, "Peter, you say I know that you love (phileo) me, but what I know is that you love (agapao) me more than you are willing to admit. In fact, I see that your love for me will be strong enough to let you endure martyrdom for my name".

That's my take, anyway. These distinctions I'm drawing in the words here might not hold true in other passages, but it makes sense to me in this passage.

In Christ,
Mike

[Nina]

So - what are shades of meaning in Christ's 'agapas' and Peter's 'philo' and why this usage?

Andreas, in NT Greek and Ancient Greek there is no difference between agapao and philo. In Modern Greek there is. The words of St. Chrysostom that Mike provided are very useful.

[Andreas Moran]

Thank you Mike and Nina - sorry to have put you to such trouble.

[Nina]

No trouble for me. I always enjoy reading the meticulous research of Mike and all what he shares. :)