STUDY NOTES  
Back   Christ’s usage of agapao and phileo  •  John 21:15–17  
 


The Situation:

The dialogue between Jesus and Peter in verse 15-17 often uses these two Greek words commonly translated with one English word: "love."

    • Verse 15- (Jesus) "Do you agapao Me? (Peter) "I phileo You."
    • Verse 16- (Jesus) "Do you agapao Me? (Peter) "I phileo You."
    • Verse 17- (Jesus) "Do you phileo Me? (Peter) "I phileo You."

The Interpretations:

Due to the different choice of Greek words, many expositors seek to find some deeper significance in these verses. Listed below are two of the more popular conclusions.

    • Christ called Peter to the highest form of love, agapao love. Due to his recent failure, the unconfident Peter feels unworthy to claim this profound love for Jesus. Still loving Jesus, Peter retorts to a lower form of love, phileo love. Jesus, asking the question for the third time then speaks at Peter’s level.
    • Agapao love refers to a cool type of affection whereas phileo love refers to a warm, intimate affection. In originally using agapao, Jesus asks Peter if his love for Him has grown cold. Peter replies to the contrary and Jesus affirms Peter’s phileo love in the third question.

The Conclusion:

I believe there are many reasons we should not see any formal significance between these two words. Peter and Jesus are basically referring to the same thing and not different degrees of love.

    • Why would Peter respond with a "Yes, Lord" if he disagreed with the choice of Christ’s words in verses 15 and 16?
    • Peter’s primary concern appears to be that his love was called into question (see verse 17), not the degree of love that he expressed for the Savior.
    • The primary focus in this section is not the type of love for Christ, but rather the need for love to properly tend Christ’s sheep.
    • Quite often the Apostle John, for stylistic reasons, uses different words to refer to the same truth. More of this follows in verses 15-17 (tend/shepherd and lambs/sheep) which few see any distinction. John’s variation is simply to avoid monotony.
    • Both words are used interchangeably in this Gospel (3:35/5:20; 11:5/11:36).
    • Both words carry different ranges of meanings throughout the Scriptures which contradict the conclusions stated for John 21:15-17.
    • There is no agreement among respectable expositors. Their interpretations, as seen above, are often contradictory.

BACK TO TOP