John 21:15-17

[lonnienord]

[BIBLE]John 21:15-17[/BIBLE] it is fairly clear what is happening here; but i have a question: I have heard that when JESUS asked "Do you love me" he used the word agape; when Peter answered he used the word for brotherly love ("filile" or something like that) Is that true? If so what is the significance of that?

all for JESUS!!
lonnie

 

[aReformedPatriot]

John 21:15-1715 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. it is fairly clear what is happening here; but i have a question: I have heard that when JESUS asked "Do you love me" he used the word agape; when Peter answered he used the word for brotherly love ("filile" or something like that) Is that true? If so what is the significance of that?

all for JESUS!!
lonnie

This is true. Agape is a more inclusive love than the other use for it. The last time Jesus says do you "love" me, he uses phileo. This signifies that Jesus came down to Peter's level. Off the top of my head, thats what I think the meaning is, without looking at a commentary.

 

[St. Worm2]

John 21:15-1715 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs. 16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. 17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep. it is fairly clear what is happening here; but i have a question: I have heard that when JESUS asked "Do you love me" he used the word agape; when Peter answered he used the word for brotherly love ("filile" or something like that) Is that true? If so what is the significance of that?

all for JESUS!!
lonnie

In all three verses, Peter, humbled by of the memory of his boast (i.e. Matthew 26:33) and his ensuing denials, is unwilling to use ἀγαπάω (agapaō ... which speaks of sacrificial love and total commitment). Instead, he uses the word φιλέω (phileō ) to describe the love ("warm affection") he has for Christ. Interestingly (as The Lord's Envoy mentions above), though Christ had twice used ἀγαπάω (v15-16), in v17 He descends to Peter's level and asks, "do you φιλέω Me", perhaps asking if Peter really even had that kind or level of love for Him.


I think the significance of this passage and its essential message to us is that to be effective in whatever ministry we are called to, that which drives us must be our supreme devotion to and love for Christ. He must be first and foremost in everything. Apart from this kind of commitment and love for Christ we will be, at best, weak and ineffective, and are doomed to fail.


I'm sorry I don't have more time to discuss this as there is MUCH more to this passage, but I hoped this helped a little.


Yours and His,
David
p.s. - I feel I should also mention to you that all of the significance that can be assigned to these two different Greek words for "love" may be 'much ado about nothing' ... at least in this case. It may all be attributed to nothing more than features of John's literary style (for instance, he does use these two Greek words interchangeably in other places in his Gospel).

 

[filosofer]

Words have a semantic range, and the context determines what specific meaning of a word is in that context. Also, words have overlap in their semantic ranges. Thus, in some contexts AGAPHW and FILEW carry the same semantic meaning; thus, changing from AGAPHW to FILEW in a text may not affect the meaning at all.

Many claim that the change in John 21 is very significant and try to make the words say something far beyond what the context allows; "great homiletical profit is given through the change in the verb!" (or so they think). Usually such a statement reflects that the person knows just enough Greek to be dangerous, but not enough to understand the text itself. However, if someone decides that the shift from AGAPAW to FILEW is significant, then what about the other word changes in these same three verses?

v. 15 Tend My lambs
v. 16 Shepherd My sheep
v. 17 Tend My sheep

What about those changes of both verbs and nouns?

See, for instance, Biblical Words and Their Meanings by Moises Silva, p. 94-6, where he discusses the changes of verbs and the problems with this. So also, Exegetical Fallacies by D. A. Carson.

 

[aReformedPatriot]

Words have a semantic range, and the context determines what specific meaning of a word is in that context. Also, words have overlap in their semantic ranges. Thus, in some contexts AGAPHW and FILEW carry the same semantic meaning; thus, changing from AGAPHW to FILEW in a text may not affect the meaning at all.

Many claim that the change in John 21 is very significant and try to make the words say something far beyond what the context allows; "great homiletical profit is given through the change in the verb!" (or so they think). Usually such a statement reflects that the person knows just enough Greek to be dangerous, but not enough to understand the text itself. However, if someone decides that the shift from AGAPAW to FILEW is significant, then what about the other word changes in these same three verses?

v. 15 Tend My lambs
v. 16 Shepherd My sheep
v. 17 Tend My sheep

What about those changes of both verbs and nouns?

See, for instance, Biblical Words and Their Meanings by Moises Silva, p. 94-6, where he discusses the changes of verbs and the problems with this. So also, Exegetical Fallacies by D. A. Carson.

haha. Thatd be me but im workin on it! I just bought Exegetical Fallacies off a buddy for a couple bucks. I heard him preach in chapel here and he was great. I look forward to reading the book.

 

[God Child]

semantics are just as important as context, they are part of context. If you don't know what the word means of why/how it is used how are you going to interpret accurately?