Is “Agape” a special kind of love?

It’s common during a sermon on love to hear that in Greek there are 4 different words for 4 different kinds of love:

Storge – family love

Eros – physical or sexual love

Phileo – human love, love of friends

Agape – divine love, unconditional love or love of choice

Agape is described as the highest form of love. It is sometimes characterized as “Godly love.”

But guess what? This labeling of the Greek words agape and phileo just isn’t true. Like the “eye of the needle” (in Matthew 19:24) referring to some special city entrance for a camel to get on its knees and crawl in or the ark resting on the top of Mt. Ararat, this likewise is a fiction that has been passed on for years and years in the Western Church. You might have even heard it at your church last Sunday. But it’s just plain false.

So let’s dig in and discover what these words really mean.

Let me start by saying that, yeah, I realize this is a long post. But it’s necessary to go into some detail to explain this fallacy, especially since so many of us have had it ingrained into our beliefs. So if this distinction is important to you, and it should if you’re serious about understanding the Bible accurately, then take the time to read on.

Typically, after the teacher mentions the 4 different words for love, it is pointed out that the New Testament contains two of them: agape and phileo. Agape is described as a “divine love”. It is a higher form of love that we should strive for. It is unconditional. It is an active love. It is God’s way of loving.

Phileo, on the other hand, is referred to as a lessor “conditional love”, or “human love”. It’s still love, but not quite as grand. Kind of like the difference between regular “love” and “true love” in The Princess Bride. Phileo is also described as an affectionate “brotherly love”. And of course this is reinforced by what we’ve heard Philadelphia called, “the city of brotherly love”, right?

This differentiation might make a good sermon for some passages. And in fact, I’ve even heard a pastor describe it that we naturally love in a phileo type of love, but we should strive to love agape. That sounds like a great take home lesson. But what about the part that this is God’s Word? Shouldn’t the truth of it matter? If those words really don’t carry that meaning, should we be telling others that they do just because it makes a good lesson?

Let’s break this out into a few points.

1. While agape is used to describe God’s love in several passages, most notably John 3:16, it does not mean some special type of “divine love”

• Agape is used to refer to human love in many, many passages – a few examples are Matthew 5:43 “love your neighbor”; John 13:34 “love one another”; Ephesians 5:33 “each one of you also must love his wife as he loves himself”  and 1 John 2:10 “Anyone who loves their brother and sister lives in the light”
• So maybe you’re thinking that it just means love in a “divine way”, a Godlike love. Ok, I understand, it’s not easy to let go of beliefs you’ve held for so long. So try this one.  Agape is used to refer to not just good human love, but even sinful human love. See for example: John 3:19 “people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil”; John 12:43 “for they loved human praise more than praise from God”; 2 Timothy 4:10 “Demas, because he loved this world, has deserted me” and 2 Peter 2:15 “They have left the straight way and wandered off to follow the way of Balaam son of Bezer, who loved the wages of wickedness”. Loving evil things is not a holy, divine love in any way, shape or form.
• In the Septuagint (which is the Greek Version of the Old Testament in circulation at the time of Christ), agape is used to refer to Amnon’s feelings for his half-sister Tamar, following his rape of her (2 Samuel 13:15, LXX).
• In Matthew 24:12, agape is described as growing cold. Yet if it is a Godly love, how can it change or be in different amounts? Be careful before you try to answer that the verse means that people are moving away from agape love and that’s why it’s cold, because that is not what the text says; rather, the Greek says that the agape is changing to cold. And by the way, this isn’t the only passage which says there are different or changing levels of agape. See also Luke 7:42-47 and 2 Corinthians 12:15. If indeed agape were some special divine love, then the only way we could make sense of these passages would be to say something like “what we really need is 100% agape to have Godly type love.” But this is just making stuff up. There’s nothing in the Bible that indicates that. It would be us just trying to justify our own misconception.
• Finally, agape was used throughout other Greek literature of the time and when the New Testament was written, it had become the standard word for love in the Greek culture. We should therefore expect it to be the standard word for love in the New Testament.

2. While phileo is used to describe love between people, it is not limited to “human love” or “brotherly love”

• Phileo is used to describe God’s love of Jesus in John 5:20
• Phileo is used to describe God’s love of man in passages such as Revelation 3:19 “Those whom I love I rebuke and discipline” and John 16:27 “the Father himself loves you because you have loved me”

Now is also a good time to return to “Philadelphia” for those that still may be thinking about “the city of brotherly love”. While it’s not scientific by any means, a quick informal survey of people (done by me) asking what the root words of Philadelphia meant, yielded the following consistent guesses (and in some cases strong belief): People thought that the “phila” part of the word means “Brotherly love” and “delphia” means city. However, that’s incorrect. Actually, the root of “phil” is “love” and the root of “adelphia” is “brotherly”. City isn’t even part of it. Participants in my little poll were surprised to learn that “adelphia” is where the brotherly part comes from. “Brotherly” is not found in the root “phil”.

3. The two words are sometimes used synonymously in the Bible

Scholars cite several Biblical examples where the two words agape and phileo appear as synonyms, including:

• Revelation 3:9 (agape) and 3:19 (phileo) – Jesus loving the church
• John 3:35 (agape) and John 5:20 (phileo) – The Father loves the Son
• Matthew 23:6 (phileo) and Luke 11:43 (agape) – Pharisees love of the most important seats in the Synagogues
• The Septuagint commonly uses the two as synonyms. For example, Genesis 37:3 “Now Israel loved (agape) Joseph more than any of his other sons”, immediately followed by Genesis 37:4 “When his brothers saw that their father loved (phileo) him more than any of them”

One author has argued that the two words are not synonyms because they each have some nuances that the other doesn’t have. For example, phileo can also mean “to kiss” as in the case of Mark 14:44. But synonyms rarely mean the exact same thing. Instead, they mean the same thing in certain contexts. For example, consider the words catch and receive. In football, you can catch a pass from the quarterback or receive a pass from the quarterback. Both mean the same thing in that context. They are synonymous. In contrast, you wouldn’t receive a fish or catch a refund from the IRS. Rather, you catch a fish and receive a refund. This is because words have a semantic range of meaning. Words that are more closely related can be synonyms, but two words that are synonyms often have some meanings in certain contexts that are outside the semantic range of the other. Still, that doesn’t mean the two words aren’t used as synonyms in other contexts.

The evidence from the Scriptures, as well as extra Biblical writings, points to the fact that in many contexts, these two words agape and phileo can be synonymous. D.A. Carson, theologian and author of Exegetical Fallacies writes, “Although it is doubtless true that the entire range of αγαπάω (agapao, to love) and the entire range of φιλέω (phileo, to love) are not exactly the same, nevertheless they enjoy substantial overlap.” (p. 31)

4. The two words are not exactly the same

This is the Bible though, and every word was chosen specifically by the Holy Spirit. So, when the context calls for it, we shouldn’t ignore a nuance that one word may have. However, at the same time, we shouldn’t make the mistake of putting all of a single word’s semantic range into every passage it appears. Linguists actually have a name for this common mistake, the “overload fallacy”. And an easy example to point to is that we wouldn’t assume that every time phileo is used that a kiss is involved. Again, context is key.

 

So does agape have in its range of meaning an active love of the will? Yes. But is agape a special kind of Godly love that we should all strive for? Clearly no.

Now are you ready for a real zinger? What if in some ways phileo is actually a more descriptive (and some might even say a more powerful) form of love than agape? What!!??

Increasingly, modern scholars are believing this to be the case. So what makes them have such a belief that is counter to the widespread views of the Western church over the last several hundred years?

1. Considering all the evidence above, it is clear that agape is not a special kind of Godly love and phileo is not exclusively a human type of love
2. Also as noted above, agape was the common word for “love” at the time – this is a developmental change in historical scholarship. Decades ago, with much less to go by, historians believed that agape was in limited use at the time of the writing of the Bible, and that because the Bible authors used the word so much, it became the common word for love. However, now that historians have had more to examine, it has been demonstrated that this view was incorrect and that common usage of agape dates back several hundred years before Christ.
3. Agape is used over 300 times in the New Testament and phileo less than 50. Again, this suggests that agape was the more common word for love and phileo was used when something special was being communicated. Think of a modern example. We say to someone “I love you.” But we might also say “I love Oreo cookies,” or  “I love flowers,” or “I love the beach.” If we say “I adore you,” or “I cherish you,” these are not as common, but often we are trying to communicate a deeper sense of that love when we use them.
4. Phileo, when used, on occasion seems to have more physical emotion tied to the usage. We already noted that it can be occasionally translated “to kiss.” Also, consider the story of Lazarus (John chapter 11). The text says that Jesus loved (agape) Lazarus (11:5), but when Mary and Martha come to appeal to Jesus, they say “Lord, the one you love (phileo) is sick”. Scholars suggest that the sisters were appealing the Jesus’ emotional love of Lazarus, so they were saying “Lazarus, our brother whom you adore, is sick.”
5. Phileo, when used often involves a deeper connection. Don Wilkins (one of the translators of the NASB) writes, “PHILEO is a higher form of love than AGAPAO. AGAPAO seems to be a ‘charitable’ love in that one provides for another’s needs, without developing a relationship as a friend to the other person (i.e. no personal ties). PHILEO, on the other hand, implies the close connection between friends and the related obligations that were so important in the ancient world.”
6. Similar to the last point, some scholars point out that agape is love that we are commanded to do. We are given the commandments to love God (Mark 12:30), love one another (Romans 13:8), love our neighbor (Mark 12:31) and love our enemies (Matthew 5:44). All agape. This required love is justified based on the intrinsic value of God and His people. As His followers, we should love these things. On the other hand, often phileo does not appear to be a required love, and is never commanded. It is more of an emotional love, a cherishing or adoring love. Think of the passages we’ve already discussed. God wills that we agape our enemies, but not phileo them.
7. 1 Corinthians 16:22 is also used to show the significance of phileo. “If anyone does not love (phileo) the Lord, let that person be cursed.” This is more than just willingly loving God. Salvation does not come from commanded love. It comes from a trusting relationship. If we are truly followers of the One True God, we should absolutely adore Him, not just as the Creator of all, but as our Abba, our Dad.
8. John 21:15-17.

 

So why the heck did I just spend 10 minutes of my life reading this? There are several lessons here.

1. A language lesson: Agape is not some sort of special kind of Godly love and phileo is not brotherly love. Sometimes they are used synonymously. Sometimes they carry a slightly different meaning depending on the context. So the next time you see the word “love” in a passage, if you discover it’s agape or phileo, don’t assume the definitions you always have. Consider the range of meaning and the context. Perhaps this will help you gain better insight into the Word and what the Holy Spirit is teaching in that passage. Remember, He put the specific words in their places.
2. A general learning lesson: Just because you hear someone use Greek in a presentation, it doesn’t mean they’re right (including me of course). That’s why we should check stuff out. “Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, accurately handling the word of truth.” (2 Timothy 2:15, NASB)
3. A lesson about God: Perhaps most significantly, this analysis reminds us that God’s love is not confined to any specific word; rather, we learn about His love through the stories, discourses and phrases in the Bible text that teach us about Him. Yes God is love. But His love is much more than just agape.

 

_____________________________________________

References / Bible nerd section

There’s already enough Bible nerd stuff up top on this post, so I don’t really have anything to add this time.

 

The following materials were used as sources:

Exegetical Fallacies by D.A. Carson

This blog post: AGAPE and PHILEO: That much different?

Love and the Bible by Robin Calamaio

The Bible Knowledge Key Word Study: The Gospels ed. by Darrell Bock

The NAS New Testament Greek Lexicon

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd Edition by Walter Bauer