Is Agape a perfect “God-like” love? All 328 hits of partial matches of “love” in the New Testament are considered in this study to determine if “agape” is only used to refer to a “God-like” love.
Some definitions are in order.
Strong’s concordance:
G25
ἀγαπάω = agapaō = ag-ap-ah’-o
Perhaps from ἄγαν agan (much; or compare [H5689]); to love (in a social or moral sense): – (be-) love (-ed). Compare G5368.
G26
ἀγάπη = agapē = ag-ah’-pay
From G25; love, that is, affection or benevolence; specifically (plural) a love feast: – (feast of) charity ([-ably]), dear, love.
Contrasted with “phileo”
G5368
φιλέω = phileō = fil-eh’-o
From G5384; to be a friend to (fond of [an individual or an object]), that is, have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling; while G25 is wider, embracing especially the judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of principle, duty and propriety: the two thus stand related very much as G2309 and G1014, or as G2372 and G3563 respectively; the former being chiefly of the heart and the latter of the head); specifically to kiss (as a mark of tenderness): – kiss, love.
There are at least 6 places in the Bible showing that “agape” can have meanings different than a “God-like” love. It can even mean a bad love!
agape:
Luke 6:32 For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.
Here we see that sinners “agape” each other.
Luke 11:43 Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings in the markets.
Jesus condemns the Pharisees for having “agape”!
John 3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
Jesus condemns men for having “agape”!!
2Timothy 4:10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.
Paul rebukes Demas for having “agape”.
2Peter 2:15 Which have forsaken the right way, and are gone astray, following the way of Balaam the son of Bosor, who loved the wages of unrighteousness;
Peter shows that Balaam’s “agape” was bad.
1John 2:15 Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
If any man has this “agape”, the “agape” of the Father is not in him.
So we clearly see that there are times in the Bible when “agape” refers to a love of something definitely not of God. How about the “phileo” kind of love? Is it just a “human” love, or “brotherly” love as often stated? While it is true that “Philadelphia” means “brotherly love”, there is nothing inherent in the word to signify that it has the meaning of a somehow less than “Godly” type of love.
phileo:
John 5:20 For the Father loveth the Son, and sheweth him all things that himself doeth: and he will shew him greater works than these, that ye may marvel.
The Father “phileo”s the Son, showing conclusively that “phileo” can also refer to the love of God.
John 11:3 Therefore his sisters sent unto him, saying, Lord, behold, he whom thou lovest is sick.
Jesus had “phileo” for Lazarus.
John 16:27 For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God.
The Father “phileo”s us because we “phileo” the Father. Isn’t this perfect love?
John 20:2 Then she runneth, and cometh to Simon Peter, and to the other disciple, whom Jesus loved, and saith unto them, They have taken away the Lord out of the sepulchre, and we know not where they have laid him.
Jesus “phileo”s John.
1Corinthians 16:22 If any man love not the Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema Maranatha.
If we don’t have “phileo” for Jesus, we are anathema!!!
Titus 3:4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,
God our Saviour has “phileo” towards us 🙂
Titus 3:15 All that are with me salute thee. Greet them that love us in the faith. Grace be with you all. Amen.
Paul says to his brethren in Christ to greet those who have “phileo” for him and his companions.
Revelation 3:19 As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten: be zealous therefore, and repent.
Jesus rebukes and chastens all those he “phileo”s.
With all this evidence, why do we still hear of “agape” being some kind of super-human “God-like” perfect love, and “phileo” being some kind of sub-perfect “human” love? I’m not sure, but guess that someone was studying to get a doctorate of divinity (above Jesus?!) and had to come up with something new and clever to catch the attention of those critiquing his thesis, and in reading something original into the text in John 21, got his doctorate, and the result is a confused remnant church today.
Lord, please help us to follow your straight word, and study for ourselves to show ourselves approved unto you. Thank you for loving us no matter what kind of Greek words you had the writers of the Bible use, and may we have that same love for you and for each other every day.
Interesting study on ‘LOVE’…
I was thinking about the time when Jesus asked Peter 3 times…. Do you love me? The first two times, Jesus asked in an ‘agape’ way. Peter answered in a ‘phileo’ way. The third time Jesus asked in a ‘phileo’ way and Peter answered in a ‘phileo’ way.
Jesus kept asking basically to my understanding, do you love me as God? Do you love me as God? Peter answered that he loved as a brother. Then, Jesus asked if he loved him as a brother and Peter answered as a brother. The point being, that Peter was not yet converted.
Later…in 1 Peter 1:8 Peter speaks of ‘agape’ now in reference to Jesus. After his conversion he now loves Jesus as God in an agape way…
God Bless,
newbie
smile…. which would you rather, Newbie… that I agape you or that I phileo you? how would you recognize which one I am touching you with to heal your down spirits?
Agape,
I’ll take either one… I’m not picky!! 🙂
Agape-san, I really wondered if i should make this study or not, because i sure don’t want to offend you, it’s just that i hear this subject matter in nearly every church i go to. I heard it just yesterday here in Manado, Indonesia. The youth leader who i was talking with was quite surprised.
.
On a somewhat related note,,, this very first full day of Sabbath School lessons for this quarter had the phrase “unconditional love” twice in it. When i raised my voice in objection, instead of being laughed out or ignored or told to shut up, i was amazed to hear several of the leaders agree, which led to the sheep nodding their heads also 🙂 🙂 🙂
Dan-san, what are your conclusions after figuring out the greek word philo/agape in the verses?
I have no clearer sight for the quality of either kind of ‘love’ being used in any of the examples you gave. Only the fact that both got interchangable. I am convinced that God IS love. He does not have love. I also am set in the notion that unconditional or conditional are words that affect the quality of God in His love. I see no inspired word in bible/EGW pointing to the use of those two adjectives/adverb coupled with the word ‘love’. I would never use unconditional love in anything I write. Nor would I use conditional love to denote God’s acts in anyway. I see Him as being unerring, unchangable, and unfailing in His zeal to save us from Satan’s rule. It’s based on an unfailing being of love or his condition of being love.
I agape you, brother… 🙂
ooops! needful correction of above message…
It should read:
“…. am set in the notion that unconditional or conditional are words that Do Not affect the quality of God in His love. Because they are not to be used in connection to Love of God in any way. Yes, they may be used in referring to conditional salvation or in conditional forgiveness, or unconditional mother love but not in reference to God being Love.
The main purpose of the study is to show that “agape” does not mean a “god-like” love that nearly everyone teaches. I’ve heard this so much in my travels, and wrote this to show that it is not true.
.
It made me sad around 3 years back to see a pastor in Cambodia preach his whole sermon about this, when his group hardly even knew who Jesus is.
.
definitely agreed with you about our definitions not changing who God is 🙂
I have read your argument against preaching about agape love and I disagree entirely. From ancient times the word agape meant to love genuinely and entirely. I don’t see your point about sinners being described as having ‘agape’ for each other or for darkness. This merely shows that they have genuine devotion to something or someone that is misdirected. By using the word agape the scripture is showing how deceived they are. That does not detract from the use of agape as describing God’s love. In the same way today that we say we ‘love’ God and God ‘loves’ us and the sinner may say that they ‘love’ their TV shows or their pornography. We use the same word but it means something different in a different context. The use of ‘agape’ is just the same as this. Different meaning in different context.
Hello Friend, Please show me where i argue against preaching about agape love. That is not at all my intent here. The intent is to show:
Is Agape a perfect “God-like” love? All 328 hits of partial matches of “love” in the New Testament are considered in this study to determine if “agape” is only used to refer to a “God-like” love.
.
You see, the problem is, many people are taught that “Agape” love is some kind of super God-like love that we must strive for, when it clearly has other “bad” uses also. Sure, “Agape” can be used for describing God’s love, and so can “Phileo”. There is nothing inherently “God-like” in either word.