Catechism book #1: What did St. Gregory Palamas mean with this?

-Sasha-

Handmaid of God
Apr 12, 2019
382
472
Midwest
✟27,318.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I'll provide the context of that quote, maybe it will help. This comes from Vol. 4 of the Philokalia, from "Topics of natural and theological science". #36
20190523_145858.jpg
20190523_145931.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Mathetes66

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 24, 2019
1,031
867
Pacifc Northwest
✟90,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
This is the CONTEXT of Gregory Palamas' quote:

This absolute & transcendent Goodness is also the source of goodness; and that which proceeds from It is likewise good & is supremely good & cannot be lacking in perfect goodness. The transcendently & absolutely perfect Goodness IS INTELLECT; thus what else could that which proceeds from It as from a source be except Intelligence-content or Logos?

But the divine Logos is not to be understood in the same way as the human thought- form that we express orally, for that proceeds not from the intellect but from a body activated by the intellect; nor is it to be understood in the same way as our human inner intelligence-principle, for this, too, is disposed within us in such a way as to give birth to different forms of sound.

Neither is the divine Logos equivalent to the reasoning power in our mind, even though this is soundless and operates entirely according to impulses that are bodiless. For the reasoning logos, as a faculty dependent on us, requires for its functioning successive moments of time, since it emerges gradually, proceeding from an incomplete starting-point to its complete conclusion.

Rather, the divine Logos is similar to the logos implanted by nature in our intellect, according to which we are made by the Creator in His own image and which constitutes the spiritual knowledge coexistent with the intellect. On the plane of the sublime Intellect of the absolute & transcendently perfect Goodness, wherein there is nothing imperfect, the divine Logos-Gnosis is indistinguishably whatever that Goodness is, except for the fact that it is derived from It. Thus the supreme Logos is ALSO the Son & is so described by us, in order that we may recognize Him to be perfect in a perfect & individual hypostasis, since He comes from the Father & is in no way inferior to the Father's essence, but is indistinguishably identical with Him, although not according to hypostasis; for His distinction as hypostasis is manifest in the fact that the Logos is begotten in a divinely fitting manner from the Father.

36. The Goodness, then, that issues by way of generation from the Source of noetic goodness is Logos. But no intelligent person could conceive of a Logos or Intelligence-content that is lifeless & without spirit. Hence the Logos, God from God, possesses the Holy Spirit that issues together with Himself from the Father.

Yet the Holy Spirit is spirit not in the sense whereby the breath conjoined to the word issuing from our lips is spirit, for this is a body and is conjoined to our speech through bodily organs; nor is it spirit in the sense whereby that which accompanies, albeit body-less, our innate reasoning process is spirit, for that, too, entails a certain impulse of the intellect that accompanies our thought-process through successive intervals of time, and progresses from incompletion to completion.

THE SPIRIT OF THE SUPREME LOGOS IS A KIND OF INEFFABLE YET INTENSE LONGING OR EROS EXPERIENCED BY THE BEGETTER FOR THE LOGOS BORN INEFFABLY FROM HIM; A LONGING EXPERIENCED ALSO BY THE BELOVED LOGOS & SON OF THE FATHER FOR HIS BEGETTER. BUT THE LOGOS POSSESSES THIS LOVE BY VIRTUE OF THE FACT THAT IT COMES FROM THE FATHER & IT RESIDES CO-NATURALLY IN HIM.

It is from the Logos's discourse with us through His incarnation that we have learned what is the name of the Spirit's distinct mode of coming to be from the Father and that the Spirit belongs not only to the Father but also to the Logos. For He says 'the Spirit of Truth, who proceeds from the Father' (John 15:26), so that we may know that from the Father comes not solely the Logos - who is begotten from the Father - but also the Spirit who proceeds from the Father.

Yet the Spirit BELONGS ALSO to the Son, who receives Him from the Father as the Spirit of Truth, Wisdom & Logos. For Truth and Wisdom constitute a Logos that befits His Begetter, a Logos that rejoices with the Father as the Father rejoices in Him. This accords with the words that He spoke through Solomon: '

I was She who rejoiced together with Him' (Prov, 8:30). Solomon did not say simply 'rejoiced' but 'rejoiced together with'. This pre-etemal rejoicing of the Father and the Son IS THE HOLY SPIRIT, as I said, is common to both, which explains why He is sent from both to those who are worthy. Yet the Spirit has His existence from the Father alone, and hence He proceeds as regards His existence only from the Father.

37. Our intellect, because created in God's image, possesses likewise the image of this sublime Eros or intense longing - an image expressed in the love experienced by the intellect for the spiritual knowledge that originates from it and continually abides in it. This love is of the intellect & in the intellect & issues forth from it together with its innermost intelligence or logos. This is shown clearly by the fact that even those who are unable to perceive what lies deeply within themselves possess an insatiable desire for spiritual knowledge.

Yet in the Archetype, in this absolutely and transcendently perfect Goodness, wherein there is nothing imperfect, the divine Eros is indistinguishably whatever that Goodness is, except for the fact that it is derived from It. HENCE THIS INTENSE LONG IS--& IS CALLED--THE HOLY SPIRIT & THE OTHER COMFORTER (cf John 14:16), since He accompanies the Logos.

Thus we know Him to be perfect in a perfect and individual hypostasis, in no way inferior to the Father's essence, but indistinguishably identical with the Son and the Father, although not according to hypostasis; for His distinction as hypostasis is manifest in the fact that He proceeds from God in a divinely fitting manner. Thus we worship one true & perfect God in three true & perfect hypostases - not, certainly, a threefold God but one who is simple.

For Goodness is not something threefold, nor a triad of goodnesses. Rather, the most subhme Goodness is a holy, awe- inspiring and venerable Trinity flowing forth out of Itself into Itself without change and divinely established in Itself before the ages. The Trinity is without limits and is limited only by Itself; It limits all things, transcends all and permits no beings to be outside Itself.

As I review this context, much of it I do not believe is SCRIPTURAL nor is any appeal to Scripture made. This is simply the speculations of a man trying to understand the infinite Triune nature of God.

"HENCE THIS INTENSE LONG IS--& IS CALLED--THE HOLY SPIRIT & THE OTHER COMFORTER (cf John 14:16), since He accompanies the Logos."

That is his conclusion & in my understanding of Scripture, that is nowhere taught as the truth. The Holy Spirit is a Person, not an intense longing or eros! And his treatment of the Logos is more of a platonic understanding of reason or intellect, rather than the Logos, as the Apostle John presents Him, as the Son of God, the living Word Who was with the Father in the beginning & Who is God, not a concept or supreme intelligence. God is so much more than this as is the Son.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I would say that, to paraphrase St John of Damascus, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father to repose in the Son, and therefore is the bond of love between Father and Son.

each Divine Person of the Trinity unites the other Two Persons in Himself.
 
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
I would say that, to paraphrase St John of Damascus, that the Spirit proceeds from the Father to repose in the Son, and therefore is the bond of love between Father and Son.

each Divine Person of the Trinity unites the other Two Persons in Himself.
What do you mean "to repose in the Son" Fr. Matthew?
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
What do you mean "to repose in the Son" Fr. Matthew?

it's how the Spirit and Son relate to each other eternally. so I dunno, only to say that the Son is not the cause of the Spirit.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Not David
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
it's how the Spirit and Son relate to each other eternally. so I dunno, only to say that the Son is not the cause of the Spirit.
I also find it weird that Palamas calls the Holy Spirit "Eros". Why is that term used?
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Mathetes66

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 24, 2019
1,031
867
Pacifc Northwest
✟90,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The love of God is agapao, agape love not eros. The Holy Spirit again is not a longing, an eros feeling but is an eternal Person of the one Being of God by nature, essence & substance. He is not a 'cause' nor is the Son nor is the Father. God is the uncausable God, the eternal God, who has no beginning (cause to be) nor end but eternally exists.

That is what the Scriptures teach, not mystical speculations of man trying to understand the incomprehensible God. The only way we know Him is through what He has revealed in Scripture & in creation & in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

-Sasha-

Handmaid of God
Apr 12, 2019
382
472
Midwest
✟27,318.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I also find it weird that Palamas calls the Holy Spirit "Eros". Why is that term used?
I would recommend reading what St John Chrysostom has to say about "Divine Eros", and another good one would be the second chapter (On Divine Eros) from "Wounded by Love", the life of St Porphyrios.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
The love of God is agapao, agape love not eros. The Holy Spirit again is not a longing, an eros feeling but is an eternal Person of the one Being of God by nature, essence & substance. He is not a 'cause' nor is the Son nor is the Father. God is the uncausable God, the eternal God, who has no beginning (cause to be) nor end but eternally exists.

That is what the Scriptures teach, not mystical speculations of man trying to understand the incomprehensible God. The only way we know Him is through what He has revealed in Scripture & in creation & in Christ.

if you knew about St Gregory, you would know he isn't speculating.
 
Upvote 0

Mathetes66

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 24, 2019
1,031
867
Pacifc Northwest
✟90,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I would recommend reading the Bible, which NEVER uses the Greek term, 'eros' and especially never of God. Only 'agape' love is mentioned as the love that God is and has. When Jesus talks to Peter and asks him 3 times if Peter 'agapes' Him, Peter says, you know Lord that I 'phileo' you, another Greek term for love used in the Bible. And if the Holy Spirit is called 'eros', then that definitely isn't biblical because that Greek word is NEVER used to describe God, the Son nor the Holy Spirit. If someone says that it is, is that not a man's speculation because the Scripture doesn't teach that at all? God's love is repeated throughout Scripture as the unconditional agape love that only God is & exercises.
 
Upvote 0

ArmyMatt

Regular Member
Supporter
Jan 26, 2007
41,468
20,025
41
Earth
✟1,455,670.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
I would recommend reading the Bible, which NEVER uses the Greek term, 'eros' and especially never of God. Only 'agape' love is mentioned as the love that God is and has. When Jesus talks to Peter and asks him 3 times if Peter 'agapes' Him, Peter says, you know Lord that I 'phileo' you, another Greek term for love used in the Bible.

I have read the Bible, and eros is used in the Greek OT.

but, I don't think the guy who didn't bother to read the rules for this forum should be talking to anyone about reading the Bible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Not David
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

-Sasha-

Handmaid of God
Apr 12, 2019
382
472
Midwest
✟27,318.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
To elaborate a little bit on my above recommendations, because I don't think they specifically refer to the Holy Spirit as eros, but rather they give us an understanding of the difference between what is referred to as "Divine eros" and what we now think of as eros in terms of an erotic/physical type of love...
Divine eros in the writings of the Saints refers to our experience of an intense and insatiable longing for God, a passionate love for Him, a desire for Him, His will, all things Divine, which exceeds and supplants any worldly desires. I believe it is the proper orientation of our passionate faculties...all of our thoughts, our desire, our hopes, are directed toward the Beloved; toward our God. There is also the sense that this longing is a gift from God which we must have humility to experience. I think, and this is only my understanding, that this is related to the operation of the Holy Spirit within our souls...that the presence of the Spirit within us enables us to experience the Divine eros. The connection I am making between this and the quote from St Gregory Palamas is that the Spirit enables us to have this experience because this longing is a quality of the Spirit. And he is saying that this quality is experienced also by the Father and the Son...the Father through the procession from Him, and the Son "by virtue of the fact that it comes from the Father in the very act through which He comes from the Father". So for us to share in this eros is a very precious thing!
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Not David
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
To elaborate a little bit on my above recommendations, because I don't think they specifically refer to the Holy Spirit as eros, but rather they give us an understanding of the difference between what is referred to as "Divine eros" and what we now think of as eros in terms of an erotic/physical type of love...
Divine eros in the writings of the Saints refers to our experience of an intense and insatiable longing for God, a passionate love for Him, a desire for Him, His will, all things Divine, which exceeds and supplants any worldly desires. I believe it is the proper orientation of our passionate faculties...all of our thoughts, our desire, our hopes, are directed toward the Beloved; toward our God. There is also the sense that this longing is a gift from God which we must have humility to experience. I think, and this is only my understanding, that this is related to the operation of the Holy Spirit within our souls...that the presence of the Spirit within us enables us to experience the Divine eros. The connection I am making between this and the quote from St Gregory Palamas is that the Spirit enables us to have this experience because this longing is a quality of the Spirit. And he is saying that this quality is experienced also by the Father and the Son...the Father through the procession from Him, and the Son "by virtue of the fact that it comes from the Father in the very act through which He comes from the Father". So for us to share in this eros is a very precious thing!
That makes more sense! When I think of "Eros" I think of a sexual or physical eros.
 
Upvote 0

Mathetes66

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Feb 24, 2019
1,031
867
Pacifc Northwest
✟90,217.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
"Threads for the faith, bible studies, discussions on Saints and Holy Tradition, inquiry into the faith, and questions asking for an Orthodox only point of view are allowed.
Debating is strictly forbidden. If you wish to debate a topic, take it to St. Justin Martyr’s Corner and start a new thread and link the old thread."

You are correct. I did not read the forum rules for this forum. The thread here did not say at the top or give any indication that it was for an Orthodox only point of view. I looked for that when i first posted. I had to go back a layer to find that out. Threads like this should say what the rule said. Those in the Catholic only one states that in the threads. So I do apologize for this. This will be my last post here.

I do not apologize for recommending people to read the Bible. That is not breaking any of the posted rules above, nor am I debating.

I simply posted the quote in its full context, pointed out a few things & gave my opinion & understanding of how that compared to Scripture.

I have forgotten that those who are Orthodox use the LXX as their OT, a TRANSLATION FROM the original language of the OT, which is Hebrew & a few places of Aramaic. (As to the accuracy & authenticity of the history of the LXX, that would be another thread & topic & debate, which is forbidden here).

As to the orginal text of the OT, which was Hebrew (and in a few places Aramaic), 'eros' is not mentioned. I didn't make myself clear on this one. I do apologize. So I will look at how the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew uses the Greek word 'eros'

Proverbs 4:6 Brenton_Greek(i) 6 μηδὲ ἐγκαταλίπῃς αὐτὴν, καὶ ἀνθέξεταί σου· ἐράσθητι αὐτῆς, καὶ τηρήσει σε. English: And forsake it not & it shall cleave to thee: LOVE it & it shall keep thee.

Kata Biblon Wiki Lexicon - ἐράω - to say (v.)

SOME CONFUSION HERE: "ἤρατε" is from "αἴρω" (take/lift-up, Mk 8:19). But "ἐρῶ" is from "λέγω" (say/tell). "Loved" is only in LXX: Prv4:6, Est 2:17. Every other place this word is used in the Septuagint, it is not translated as loved. And here one is talking about a love for wisdom, personified as a 'she', not God. The other is referring to the love of a king for Esther, a woman, a she.

As the last website did an analysis, every other place this word is translated is as--lifted up or saying-- depending on the context. Yet why one may ask did the Septuagint translator deviate from all other examples in the OT (or NT) & instead translate the rare usage of this world as love & only 2 times?

It could easily be translated like every other place as lifting up wisdom or saying to it. And again in these two examples, none is used to describe God nor the Son nor the Holy Spirit but is used to refer to a 'she.'

For the Hebrew of the OT, the picture is quite different. With respect to words for love, it resembles our languages like English or German: there is one & only one word for love (the root ahav (he: אהב) with the noun ahava) which covers the concept as broadly as our modern word “love”. God’s love (Jr.31:3), love of God (Dt.6:5), love of the fellow man (Lv.19:18), love of a friend (2Sam.1:26), love of a girl (Gen.29:20), mere sex (Prov.7:18), love of money (Eccl.5:9), and love of vanity (Ps.4:3) are all called by the same name.

The LXX translates this Hebrew word of love 196 times in the OT as 'agape'--(except examples below & only one time as 'eros.') The Greek root agape for translating the Hebrew 'ahava' is translated with the following exceptions other than agape: 31 times philia, 15 times erastes (illicit lovers) & once eros (adulterous sex).

Prov 7:18 Brenton(i) 18 Come & let us enjoy love until the morning; come & let us embrace in love. Brenton_Greek(i) 18 Ἐλθὲ καὶ ἀπολαύσωμεν φιλίας ἕως ὄρθρου, δεῦρο καὶ ἐγκυλισθῶμεν ἔρωτι.

So again, out of 196 times the Hebrew word for love is translated in the LXX, only once out of those 196 is the word 'eros' used. (16X if you use illicit lovers)

And the one example of translating the Hebrew word for love as 'eros' above in the Septuagint is mentioning it as committing sexual adultery. This is what the primary aspect of the Greek word for 'eros' referred to & from which we get our word erotic from.

Eros comes from the mythological Greek god Eros & was the god of love, the god of sexual desire, physical attraction & physical love. Eros was thought to be the son of Aphrodite who was said to have interfered between the affairs of the gods & mankind causing the erotically mutual bonds of love at the sexually arousal level.

Again, this rare use of 'eros' in the LXX appears to have no reference concerning God but with desire for wisdom as a she or a king desiring a woman or for illicit sex, including adultery.

One would normally ask such a question because in the Song of Solomon's one would rationally think 'eros' would be used to describe the relationship of a husband to his wife. Yet in the 11 occurrences this word is found there, every time it is translated as agape. A even stronger case can be made if one sees it as an allegory concerning Christ & His bride, the church. Only agape is used.

So yes, if you subscribe to the presently accepted copy of the Septuagint translation of the original Hebrew among the many different Septuagint translations that were made, there are a few examples where 'eros' is used; but again not referring to God. If anyone can show me any from the OT, please do. And with that I am done.
 
Upvote 0

Not David

I'm back!
Apr 6, 2018
7,356
5,235
25
USA
✟231,310.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Single
You are correct. I did not read the forum rules for this forum. The thread here did not say at the top or give any indication that it was for an Orthodox only point of view. I looked for that when i first posted. I had to go back a layer to find that out. Threads like this should say what the rule said. Those in the Catholic only one states that in the threads. So I do apologize for this. This will be my last post here.

I do not apologize for recommending people to read the Bible. That is not breaking any of the posted rules above, nor am I debating.

I simply posted the quote in its full context, pointed out a few things & gave my opinion & understanding of how that compared to Scripture.

I have forgotten that those who are Orthodox use the LXX as their OT, a TRANSLATION FROM the original language of the OT, which is Hebrew & a few places of Aramaic. (As to the accuracy & authenticity of the history of the LXX, that would be another thread & topic & debate, which is forbidden here).

As to the orginal text of the OT, which was Hebrew (and in a few places Aramaic), 'eros' is not mentioned. I didn't make myself clear on this one. I do apologize. So I will look at how the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew uses the Greek word 'eros'

Proverbs 4:6 Brenton_Greek(i) 6 μηδὲ ἐγκαταλίπῃς αὐτὴν, καὶ ἀνθέξεταί σου· ἐράσθητι αὐτῆς, καὶ τηρήσει σε. English: And forsake it not & it shall cleave to thee: LOVE it & it shall keep thee.

Kata Biblon Wiki Lexicon - ἐράω - to say (v.)

SOME CONFUSION HERE: "ἤρατε" is from "αἴρω" (take/lift-up, Mk 8:19). But "ἐρῶ" is from "λέγω" (say/tell). "Loved" is only in LXX: Prv4:6, Est 2:17. Every other place this word is used in the Septuagint, it is not translated as loved. And here one is talking about a love for wisdom, personified as a 'she', not God. The other is referring to the love of a king for Esther, a woman, a she.

As the last website did an analysis, every other place this word is translated is as--lifted up or saying-- depending on the context. Yet why one may ask did the Septuagint translator deviate from all other examples in the OT (or NT) & instead translate the rare usage of this world as love & only 2 times?

It could easily be translated like every other place as lifting up wisdom or saying to it. And again in these two examples, none is used to describe God nor the Son nor the Holy Spirit but is used to refer to a 'she.'

For the Hebrew of the OT, the picture is quite different. With respect to words for love, it resembles our languages like English or German: there is one & only one word for love (the root ahav (he: אהב) with the noun ahava) which covers the concept as broadly as our modern word “love”. God’s love (Jr.31:3), love of God (Dt.6:5), love of the fellow man (Lv.19:18), love of a friend (2Sam.1:26), love of a girl (Gen.29:20), mere sex (Prov.7:18), love of money (Eccl.5:9), and love of vanity (Ps.4:3) are all called by the same name.

The LXX translates this Hebrew word of love 196 times in the OT as 'agape'--(except examples below & only one time as 'eros.') The Greek root agape for translating the Hebrew 'ahava' is translated with the following exceptions other than agape: 31 times philia, 15 times erastes (illicit lovers) & once eros (adulterous sex).

Prov 7:18 Brenton(i) 18 Come & let us enjoy love until the morning; come & let us embrace in love. Brenton_Greek(i) 18 Ἐλθὲ καὶ ἀπολαύσωμεν φιλίας ἕως ὄρθρου, δεῦρο καὶ ἐγκυλισθῶμεν ἔρωτι.

So again, out of 196 times the Hebrew word for love is translated in the LXX, only once out of those 196 is the word 'eros' used. (16X if you use illicit lovers)

And the one example of translating the Hebrew word for love as 'eros' above in the Septuagint is mentioning it as committing sexual adultery. This is what the primary aspect of the Greek word for 'eros' referred to & from which we get our word erotic from.

Eros comes from the mythological Greek god Eros & was the god of love, the god of sexual desire, physical attraction & physical love. Eros was thought to be the son of Aphrodite who was said to have interfered between the affairs of the gods & mankind causing the erotically mutual bonds of love at the sexually arousal level.

Again, this rare use of 'eros' in the LXX appears to have no reference concerning God but with desire for wisdom as a she or a king desiring a woman or for illicit sex, including adultery.

One would normally ask such a question because in the Song of Solomon's one would rationally think 'eros' would be used to describe the relationship of a husband to his wife. Yet in the 11 occurrences this word is found there, every time it is translated as agape. A even stronger case can be made if one sees it as an allegory concerning Christ & His bride, the church. Only agape is used.

So yes, if you subscribe to the presently accepted copy of the Septuagint translation of the original Hebrew among the many different Septuagint translations that were made, there are a few examples where 'eros' is used; but again not referring to God. If anyone can show me any from the OT, please do. And with that I am done.
The Orthodox Church wrote the Bible.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

-Sasha-

Handmaid of God
Apr 12, 2019
382
472
Midwest
✟27,318.00
Country
United States
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Marital Status
Married
For the Hebrew of the OT, the picture is quite different. With respect to words for love, it resembles our languages like English or German: there is one & only one word for love (the root ahav (he: אהב) with the noun ahava) which covers the concept as broadly as our modern word “love”.
Since Hebrew has only one "love" word which encompasses all concepts of love, would it not be reasonable to say that God, being love, would encompass all of the possible sorts of love (perfectly, that is - not in an unnatural/imperfect fallen manner with which we often love) which are given separate names in other languages? In saying that "Hebrew does not have a distinct word for eros, apart from the same word that is used for all types of love", that's not to say that the sort of love described by the word "eros" didn't exist among the Hebrews, only that they called it by the same name as all other loves. So, to say that the OT in Hebrew/Aramaic didn't contain "eros" is inaccurate, as this would have been encompassed within their more broad word for love. One could just as easily say that agape love was not once mentioned in the Hebrew writings, which while technically accurate, is also false.
 
Upvote 0