George Desnoyers
It could be argued that agapao and phileo, two Greek words for love important in the New Testament, refer to love more noble than eros, the Koine Greek word for erotic love. However, there are some misconceptions about agapao and phileo that make the former a symbol for a kind of loving superior to the loving symbolized by the latter. That idea is not merited from anything in the New Testament or other literature of the period in which the New Testament was authored. Phileo does not denote an inferior type of loving compared with that symbolized by agapao.
There is a small difference between phileo and agapao as they are used in the New Testament. I will explain that difference at the close, after first addressing a few incorrect ideas.
Let’s begin by looking at the objects of love that are seen in the NT.
- Phileo is used for: the love of high places (Matthew 23:6, Luke 20:46), The Father’s love for the Son (John 5:20), Jesus’ love for his disciples (John 11:3, John 20:2), the Father’s love of disciples (John 16:27), love within families (Matthew 10:37), love among Christians (Titus 3:15), love of the world (John 15:19), God’s love for those he chastens (Revelation 3:19), and our love for Jesus (1 Corinthians 16:22).
- Agapao is used for: the love of high places (Luke 11:43), the Father’s love for the Son (John 3:35), Jesus’ love for his disciples (John 11:5, John 21:7), the Father’s love of disciples (John 14:21), love within families (Ephesians 5:25), love among Christians (John 13:34-35), love of the world (John 3:19, John 12:43, 1 John 2:15, 2 Timothy 4:10), God’s love for those he chastens (Hebrews 12:6), our love for Jesus (John 14:21), and our love of the Father (Romans 8:28, 1 John 4:10,19).
The only difference in the two lists above is that I didn’t cite a positive usage of phileo for our love of the Father. There is an instance that comes very, very close to that. It is in 2 Timothy 3:4. The reason I didn’t include it in the above list for phileo is because of the particular usage. It comes in a verse describing wicked people in the last days that says, “Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;”. Notice the negative character; people are criticized for not having the phileo type of love for the Father.
That the two Koine Greek verbs take virtually all the same objects, as shown by the above, does not mean that the two words are the same. The English verbs “catch” and “throw” each take the object “ball,” but have very different meanings. There is a point to having the two words, agapao and phileo, which I will explain below. However, from the lists above, two things should be clear:
- The fact that agapao is used for the love of high places (Luke 11:43), and also for love of the world (John 3:19, John 12:43, 1 John 2:15, 2 Timothy 4:10), makes perfectly clear that agapao is not a superior and always wonderful and selfless kind of loving (compared with phileo); and
- 1 Corinthians 16:22 (“If anyone loves not the Lord, let him be anathema maranatha.”) makes perfectly clear that Paul believed it is right for disciples to love (verb phileo) Jesus in exactly the same way that Peter said (three times) he loved Jesus in John 21:15-17.
Some people misinterpret John 21:15-17, where Jesus asked Peter three times if he (Peter) loved Jesus, and are quick to be critical of Peter’s replies. Note, however, that Jesus does not rebuke Peter for his answers, and he doesn’t appear offended in the slightest degree. When Peter was offended, John tells us precisely why. John tells us that Peter was offended because Jesus had asked him the same question three times. According to those who think agapao loving is vastly superior to phileo loving, Jesus did not ask the same question three times. Under their theory, Jesus asked one question twice (verses 15 and 16) and a different question once (verse 17). Why did both Peter and John think it was the same question three times? The reason is simply that, in the setting and context provided, the words meant the same thing.
It’s sometimes said that agape, the noun from agapao, was uniquely a Christian word used by no-one but Christians. However the noun agape does* appear in non-Christian writing of the early church period. I can understand why members of a group might want to usurp a word – especially a word for something as important as love – and claim that it has a special meaning only for them. But in this case, the only thing that may have been unique to Christians was their use of the word agape as a name for their ritual feast.
One more thing – and this is applicable to languages in general: Koine Greek words, just like modern English words, were often used in multiple ways. It can be hard to state principles about word usages and make promises that the principles will never seem to have exceptions.
Finally, here is the difference between the two words. Phileo was generally used when there was some relationship or affinity between the lover and the object loved. It does not have to be a family relationship. Peter was a close friend and disciple of Jesus, so it was no error on his part, or anything to scold him for, when he used the verb phileo in answering Jesus’ questions in John 21:15-17. Agapao, on the other hand, was generally used when there was not a significant relationship or affinity between the lover and the object of the love.
*A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, Second Edition, Walter Bauer (author), F. Wilbur ZGingrich (author), William F. Arndt (editor), and Frederick W. Danker (editor).
August 30, 2019