Agape or Phileo: Which Love is Greater?
Question:
C.S. Lewis writes that there are four kinds of love and that the greatest of the four types is Agape. Do you think that C.S. Lewis is right or wrong?
Response:
First of all, I should say upfront that I have not read Lewis' book: The Four Loves. My feeling is that Lewis' thesis is flawed, if used to define biblical love. Let's jump to the Bible and begin with a quick examination of John 21:15-17:
If you believe that Agape love is somehow greater than Phileo love, then John 21-15-17 doesn't make any sense. Sadly, I have heard way too many sermons that simply pervert the text and insist that the last round of questioning uses the word agape instead of phileo when it simply does not, in order to support this heretical argument that there are four types of biblical love. The fact of the matter is that in New Testament usage, agape and phileo are interchangeable words for the Hebrew concept of "steadfast love" or "chesed," which is true, biblical love.
As for the other forms of love that Lewis presents, eros and storge, eros is a vice and storge is used neither in the Greek Old Testament, nor the Greek New Testament. In other words, storge is not used in the Bible at all, although it does show up in extra biblical writings like Maccabees, but to use it to define Biblical love is an error.
So, let's go back to John 21:15-17. Why did the writer, John, use agape and phileo so interchangeably? I think the simple answer is this: the original conversation did not happen in Greek but likely in Aramaic and John did not want the reader to think that the common Greek usage of agape and phileo defined the nature of biblical love. So, he used both words to show there was something greater at stake than the pagan understanding of love.
So, is C.S. Lewis wrong? I don't know because I haven't read his book, but it sounds like he may have explained how the pagans understood love. Christians should not accept the same understanding, as the Apostles go through great pains to define love in the epistles. So, what is Biblical Love or "chesed?" I will take a shot at doing this in another posting using the epistles.
In Christ, Marty
C.S. Lewis writes that there are four kinds of love and that the greatest of the four types is Agape. Do you think that C.S. Lewis is right or wrong?
Response:
First of all, I should say upfront that I have not read Lewis' book: The Four Loves. My feeling is that Lewis' thesis is flawed, if used to define biblical love. Let's jump to the Bible and begin with a quick examination of John 21:15-17:
John 21:15-17 15 When they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, "Simon, son of John, do you love [agape] me more than these?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love [phileo] you." He said to him, "Feed my lambs." 16 He said to him a second time, "Simon, son of John, do you love [agape] me?" He said to him, "Yes, Lord; you know that I love [phileo] you." He said to him, "Tend my sheep." 17 He said to him the third time, "Simon, son of John, do you love [phileo] me?" Peter was grieved because he said to him the third time, "Do you love [phileo] me?" and he said to him, "Lord, you know everything; you know that I love [phileo] you." Jesus said to him, "Feed my sheep.
Ok, so I inserted the Greek root into the passage above. Notice that Jesus asks, do you agape [love] me two times and Peter answers him both times that he phileo [loves] him. However, the third time, Jesus asks Peter this question, Jesus asks do you phileo [love] me and Peter is heartbroken because Jesus has asked him now three times if he loves [phileo] him and responds, "you know that I phileo [love] you.If you believe that Agape love is somehow greater than Phileo love, then John 21-15-17 doesn't make any sense. Sadly, I have heard way too many sermons that simply pervert the text and insist that the last round of questioning uses the word agape instead of phileo when it simply does not, in order to support this heretical argument that there are four types of biblical love. The fact of the matter is that in New Testament usage, agape and phileo are interchangeable words for the Hebrew concept of "steadfast love" or "chesed," which is true, biblical love.
As for the other forms of love that Lewis presents, eros and storge, eros is a vice and storge is used neither in the Greek Old Testament, nor the Greek New Testament. In other words, storge is not used in the Bible at all, although it does show up in extra biblical writings like Maccabees, but to use it to define Biblical love is an error.
So, let's go back to John 21:15-17. Why did the writer, John, use agape and phileo so interchangeably? I think the simple answer is this: the original conversation did not happen in Greek but likely in Aramaic and John did not want the reader to think that the common Greek usage of agape and phileo defined the nature of biblical love. So, he used both words to show there was something greater at stake than the pagan understanding of love.
So, is C.S. Lewis wrong? I don't know because I haven't read his book, but it sounds like he may have explained how the pagans understood love. Christians should not accept the same understanding, as the Apostles go through great pains to define love in the epistles. So, what is Biblical Love or "chesed?" I will take a shot at doing this in another posting using the epistles.
In Christ, Marty
I've been trying to track down why the Greek-speaking Christians first started using that very unusual, archaic word "agape." When the teachings of Jesus in their original Aramaic form were first transcribed into Greek, why was "agape" used since it was not a common word for love? I started wondering about this when I heard that the King James Version of 1 Cor. 13 used "charity" instead of "love" to translate "agape," that was a reflection of the thinking that Paul did not mean "agape" to be a word for love. The English word "love" does seem to be a far cry from whatever Paul meant in 1 Cor. 13 and Romans 5:5.
Reply to this
Bob,
I think that the simplest explanation to your question is simply the facts themselves.
Agape was widely used by Greek speaking people, including many Jews, for hundreds of years, both before and after the time of Christ, to describe the concept of love. In fact, agape is used to describe the concept of biblical love in the LXX, Apocrypha, Josephus' histories, and Philo's writings. So its no small wonder that the Apostles used the word in their own writings. It would be a lie though to say that the early Church hijacked the word - it did not and the overwhelming ancient evidence testifies to this.
What may be surprising to many is that the word *phileo" was also used to connote the word love in the same biblical and extra-biblical documents at very high frequencies. That is why John, for example, in his Gospel has no problem using the words interchangeably (see the above article). I think that the reason for this is that both words came from the same pagan tradition and so required some re-definition to get to the essence of the Hebrew word "chesed" which is probably best defined as "steadfast love" or "covenant love."
Unfortunately, chesed or "covenantal love" is a tough concept for us to grasp because we are so full of sin, especially since the vast masses of us live in violation of God's covenants. There are countless vain attempts at trying to get to a definition of love, all of which fail because they rely on their own authority, rather than biblical authority. This is why the English word "love" is so woefully misunderstood.
Fortunately, this is the same problem that Paul had in his predominantly Gentile churches. So, of all the biblical writers, he develops the best definition of love using the "one another" language we find in our English bibles, which derives from a singular Greek word elethon. Chesed or biblical love equates to the following actions:
F - Forgive - "forgive one another"
A - Accept - "accept one another"
C - Care - "care for one another"
E - Encourage - 'encouarage one another"
S - Support - "support one another"
and
S - Submit - "submit to one another as to the Lord"
So, biblically, one can think of a loving person as a forgiving, accepting, caring, encouraging, and supporting person who submits him or herself to God's commandments. Hate is simply the antithesis: being an unforgiving, unaccepting, uncaring, unencouraging, and unsupporting person living in rebellion to God's commandments. I will post something shortly to help you do the same research yourself.
So, I would urge you not to get to wrapped up in trying to find a "supernatural" meaning within the word, as this is the essence of Kabbalah or witchcraft, which somehow believes that one can access and control divine power.
I hope this helps. In Christ, Marty
Reply to this
Practicing or living a life of Agape might not be easy BUT, it worth every step of the way. When you begin to walk in Agape, nothing matters to you that living right for others. I never said it was going to be easy, but it's worth it.
Reply to this
Can I simply say what a relief to seek out somebody who truly is aware of what theyre talking about on the internet. You definitely know easy methods to bring a difficulty to gentle and make it important. More individuals must learn this and perceive this aspect of the story. I cant imagine youre no more well-liked because you undoubtedly have the gift. .
Reply to this