Page 1 of 2
Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 9:33 pm
by Paidion
Please read John 21:2-14
1. (a) Jesus: "Simon Johnson, do you love me more than these?"
1. (b) Peter: "Yes, Lord, you know that I am fond of you."
1. (c) Jesus: "Feed my lambs."
2. (a) Jesus: "Simon Johnson, do you love me?"
2. (b) Peter: "Yes, Lord, you know that I am fond of you."
2. (c) Jeus: "Shepherd my sheep."
3. (a) Jesus: Simon Johnson, are you fond of me?
3. (b) Peter: Lord, you know everything. You perceive that I am fond of you.
3. (c) Jesus: Feed my sheep.
Peter replies that he is fond of Jesus, each time Jesus asks. But he does not say that he LOVES Jesus (αγαπαω).
It is interesting that on the third time, Jesus just asks whether Peter is fond of him. Do you see any significance in this?
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 9:56 pm
by TheEditor
Hi Paidion,
The only significance I could see would be that he asked 3 times, and that Peter had denied him 3 times. As far as the words; Agape is a broader term and Philea is narrower, referring more to fondness of friendship, etc. It may simply be that the two words were used interchangeably. For instance, I had a chat with someone once that made a big issue over the use of Agape and insisted it was always significant. However, I pointed out that in the parallel accounts of Luke 11:43 and Mattew 23:6 the word Agape is used in Luke and Philea in Matthew. It may be that people used words then much as we use them now--interchangeably.
Regards, Brenden.
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 10:31 pm
by Paidion
Thank you Brenden, for pointing out that the verb "φιλεω" is used in Matt 23:6, where as "αγαπαω" is used in the parallel verse in Luke 11:43.
That would seem to indicate that the words are used synonymously.
Yet the question remains: "Why did the writers choose one word instead of another? And in the passage in the original post, why does John use "αγαπαω" for "love" in Christ's first two questions, where as he uses "φιλεω" for Peter's answers? If the words are synonymous then one would think whichever word John chose to use, he would use it consistently.
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Sun Jul 20, 2014 11:21 pm
by dizerner
[user account removed]
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:04 am
by TheEditor
Hi Diszerner,
You wrote:
Christ was emphasizing that only God can truly agape love
Could you please expand on this for me?
Also, you mentioned Romans 9:22, and I'm unsure what part of this verse you feel is not revealed properly by translators?
Regards, Brenden.
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 3:26 am
by dizerner
[user account removed]
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 1:23 pm
by TheEditor
Hi Diszerner,
Agape is a principled love, that may or may not include affection. Other loves (at least as for as the Greek words are concerned) may or may not be principled. I don't know that I can agree that the words are used as exclusively as we think today. I was raised to believe they were. But the more I read of the Scriptures over the years, the more I could see they were many times used interechangeably. We are to "agape" according to Paul in 1 Corinthians 13. The Pharisees "agape" the chief seats in the Synagogue.
The translation I was weaned on (The NWT) translates Romans this way:
If, now, God, although having the will to demonstrate his wrath and to make his power known, tolerated with much long-suffering vessels of wrath made fit for destruction, in order that he might make known the riches of his glory upon vessels of mercy, which he prepared beforehand for glory, namely, us, whom he called not only from among Jews but also from among nations, [what of it]?
(Romans 9:22-24)
I see the difference reproduced here. What significance do you see in this? Do you feel that using the same term, "prepared", makes a stronger case for Calvinism?
Regards, Brenden.
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 9:05 pm
by dizerner
[user account removed]
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Mon Jul 21, 2014 10:10 pm
by Homer
I'm not sure what a modern equivalent for Peter's words would be, one translation used "fond of you" which I liked. Maybe something like "you know that I care for you." In any case Peter wouldn't use agape.
But isn't it highly likely that the Apostle John chose those the words to express what Jesus and Peter meant when they actually had the conversation in Aramaic? It would be interesting to know what Aramaic word(s) would have been used for "love".
Re: Why was Peter loathe to profess love for Christ?
Posted: Tue Jul 22, 2014 12:47 am
by StevenD
Though it may not eliminate any of the question marks about the sense that Jesus, Peter, or John intended, the Peshitta is fairly straightforward in using a single Aramaic word (רחם racham, probably best translated "love" in each instance) throughout 21:15-17 in place of the two Greek terms.
Maybe the root would be familiar to some as the song "El Shaddai" by Michael Card has a lyric--"Er'cham-cha na Adonai". I think this resembles a segment of the first or second verse of Psalm 18 (minus the "na"), "I will love you, LORD". This is probably the only instance in the Hebrew Bible that employs this particular verb with God as the object. The Hebrew verb is often associated with tender mercies or compassion (Ps. 51:1b, Heb. v. 3).
Off topic: I'm guessing that those who claim Aramaic primacy over the Greek text may find it difficult to give an explanation for two Greek terms that (I think) are consistently represented among the Greek textual tradition, while only one Aramaic term is used. If this is a polysemous (that's a big word for me) term translated from an Aramaic original, one would expect to find variance throughout the Greek texts. Unless I'm mistaken, the texts are fairly consistent about this.
On another note, D.A. Carson discussed this subject in his book Exegetical Fallacies. I do not currently have access to the book, but I recall reading something there that might contribute to this discussion.
Steven D.