"Perverted Gospel"

  • Thread starter Thread starter hsmom2four
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
H

hsmom2four

Guest
Hi~

Been searching for an answer for this but not finding anything…

We (my dh & I) received a tract that states the Gospel has been perverted because of a false teaching of St. Augustine on “caritas” - love. It states that “caritas” is a combining of the Greek “eros” - man seeking God, and “agape” - God’s unconditional love for man; and this “caritas” is the basis for a “faith + works” theology, which the tract condemns as a false theology that plunged the church into the Dark Ages. :rolleyes:

The main biblical quote used to support this “perversion” is John 21:15-17, where Jesus asks Peter 3 times, “Do you love me?” The first two times, the Greek word used by Jesus is “agape;” however, Peter’s response is “phileo” - brotherly love. The third time, the Greek given for Jesus’ question is “phileo,” to which Peter again responds with “phileo.” However, this tract says that Peter is “grieved” not because this is the 3rd time Jesus is asking him, but because Jesus has used “phileo” instead of “agape.”

The point of all of this is to illustrate that God gives us “agape” which means this unconditional love is the source of our salvation, and not any works that we do. It goes on to illustrate that point with the usual Scripture quotes on “faith alone” etc.

What the tract fails to explain is:
  1. What is the authority for this interpretation (i.e. the reason Peter is grieved)?
  2. Why does Jesus change to “phileo?” If Jesus is God, and God loves us unconditionally (agape), is Jesus now saying that He only loves Peter as “phileo” because Peter cannot return the “agape?” That sure sounds like a “condition” to me, and thus contradicts the point they are trying to prove?
Any comments or suggestions?
 
I’m not sure what the tract’s argument even has to do with this passage from John, since it involves *agape/phileo *rather than agape/eros. I am no Greek expert, but my sense of *agape *is love put into action, not love specifically directed from God to us. We are called to *agape *toward God and our neighbor.

When Jesus switches from agape to phileo, my first thought is that he’s lowered his expectations. “Peter, do you at least *phileis *me? Can you go that far? Then feed my sheep.” As for Peter being grieved, my Bible has a footnote that points out, “The triple question recalls Peter’s triple denial (18:17,25-27).” That makes a lot of sense to me; the repetition of Jesus’ question (and the substance of the question) dredges up guilt Peter still feels over denying the Lord.
 
I’m certainly no Greek scholar (heck, I can barely handle english!) but there seems to be quite a bit of confusion over whether this whole agape-phileo thing is even relavent in that passage.

There are many sources that present arguments that throughout the New Testament these two words for love are mixed and matched all over the place in similar contexts. The gist of this argument seems to be that the point of Jn 21 is the mirroring of Peter’s threefold denial and Peter’s guilt over it (as Al Eluia said above) and that the choice of words for love is not significant.

A typical explanation of this is here .

Who knows. It’s all Greek to me… 😉
 
40.png
OhioBob:
A typical explanation of this is here .

Who knows. It’s all Greek to me… 😉
Click to expand...
Great site - thanks! :clapping:

Good point, too. I was browsing Strong’s Concordance online last night, and I too, noticed that ‘phileo’ was sometimes also used when talking about God’s love for us, and ‘agape’ for lesser things. The tract makes the statement that agape “appears some 87 times in the Greek New Testament and always [emphasis mine] refers to God’s unconditional, unfailing, and selfless love…”

However, according to the test (and the false supposition of the meanings of the two words) my dh has to ‘agape’ me (Eph.5:28), but I only have to “phileo” him (Titus 2:4) - what a deal! :cool:
 
If you can look at a copy of it…

“The Priest is not His Own” by Sheen discusses this. Unfortunately, I can’t remember it well!
 
h(name removed by moderator)2four:
However, according to the test (and the false supposition of the meanings of the two words) my dh has to ‘agape’ me (Eph.5:28), but I only have to “phileo” him (Titus 2:4) - what a deal! :cool:
Click to expand...
Shhhh. Don’t tell my wife… My agape is pretty rusty.
😉
 
By the way, what does “dh” mean in the original post? Surely not designated hitter!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top