Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

He said to him the third time

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by RJ Mac View Post
    may I add to the mix these thoughts.
    Thanks for them, good stuff. Just thinking when I read your post how Jesus changes the request of Peter as well. feed lambs, tend sheep, feed sheep. A picture of growth there I think, with individuals and the earthly church.

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by RoadWarrior View Post
    Jesus calls all Christians to "agape" love one another.

    Jn 13:34-35
    34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
    NKJV
    Well, from the lack of responses to my grammar question I am feeling like the only one who never really thought as love as a noun before. Just pondering the nature of noun love, to have love. Something that is a thing but you cannot hold or see. Being different than the act of loving. Your passage a good one to look at as it has both in it, verb and noun.

    What does it mean to "have love" itself without looking at it in action?

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by brant View Post
    im not sure of the difference between agape and phileo but i have found that they seem to be each one used in different ways
    I just wanted to share what my wife said to me when I asked her. Her native language is Finnish and is similar to Greek only in that it has as many tenses or more. In her translation it is clear different words are used. Good lesson in using all my resources. Anyway...

    She said she thought agape is love that asks for nothing in return.

    And phileo is like a love that is a two way street fellowship kind.

    Then thinking of your question about the Father and the Son in phileo, I thought of a father and child working on a project together enjoying each other's company. Like the father is building a workbench and the kid has their little toy hammer, watching the father and imitating him, the father showing how to use the hammer, and laughing together.

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by Biastai View Post
    I could just be on a totally different wavelength as you
    No same wavelength for sure, thanks for the other thoughts. Cool stuff.

    I'm getting very convicted the fish are being talked about.

    After reading the bread thread on the board I am thinking about how they had bread with the fish. And amazed I could spend a year or two on this chapter alone I think.

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
    Peter had even boasted that he would stand by Christ though all men forsook him (Mark 14:29, Matt 26:33, John 13:36-38)

    Jesus was asking Peter if he still thinks that he loves Him more than others.
    So are you saying you think all the fish are red herrings?



    I had to figure out a way to get that joke in here somewhere....

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • tt1106
    replied
    What he was asking was if Peter loved him more than anything, including "more than these".
    Peter could not answer that he could. You have to remember that Peter comes with Baggage. He had been rebuked by Jesus many times and he had just fulfilled the prophecy of the rooster. Peter, even now is caught fishing instead of doing what Jesus had told him to do.
    Jesus asks him if he loves him more than anything. The implication is that, if he did, he wouldn't be fishing for fish.
    Peter responds with basically, yes, I love you very fondly.
    Jesus asks him again, Peter do you love me Supremely. Peter answers in the same way, I am very fond of you.
    The third time, he asks him if he is loves him very fondly. Peter knows the difference and is embarassed by the Lord's change in meaning. He responds in the affirmative. He receives the commandment, "Feed my sheep"
    This is one of favorites exchanges. For so many reasons. Peter goes on to plant churches and is martyred for his faith.

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    First I just want to encourage everybody to talk amongst themselves as well as just to me. I am sure I could glean some more from this topic in that and good for the lurkers too. That said.

    I started to reply to some posts here and got stuck on a couple things. I will get back to the responses. I missed something completely that I did not see anyone else mention. I even posted the definition and missed it…

    The word used by Jesus the first two times was agapao G25 from Strong’s numbers

    So this use is a verb and agape G26 is a noun.

    This is a bit of a sideways direction but what really is the difference in context? I honestly never really thought about this before. Grammar buffs help me out please.

    Jesus did not really ask if Peter had *agape* love for Him but if he was loving Him, would that be fair to say?

    How does this change anything if it does?

    Second;

    As brought up by Brant I think it good to look at if agape is perfect love. I think of this verses.

    Mat 5:45 "that G3704 you may be G1096 (G5638) sons G5207 of your G5216 Father G3962 in G3588 G1722 heaven G3772 ; for G3754 He makes G393 (00) His G846 sun G2246 rise G393 (G5719) on G1909 the evil G4190 and G2532 on the good G18, and G2532 sends rain G1026 (G5719) on G1909 the just G1342 and G2532 on the unjust G94.
    Mat 5:46 "For G1063 if G1437 you love G25 (G5661) those who G3588 love G25 (G5723) you G5209, what G5101 reward G3408 have G2192 (G5719) you? Do G4160 (G5719) not G3780 even G2532 the tax collectors G5057 do the same G846?

    The “tax collectors” who are suggested to be “the evil” *I think* are capable of this kind of love, why consider it “perfect God love”? I was thinking most Greek parents would tell their kids they “agape” them while being imperfect.

    Thanks in peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • tt1106
    replied
    Certainly Peter was feeling like a total waste of flesh. After vowing repeatedly to die for Jesus, he denies him three times before the cock crows.
    Jesus makes him confront himself in public and asks him three times about his love for the savior.
    I agree whole heatedly with the discussion already mentioned. Jesus did use a different word, to shore up Peter.
    Peter was asked thrice to remedy the 3 denials.
    My favorite part of the story is the next verse.

    “Most assuredly, I say to you, when you were younger, you girded yourself and walked where you wished; but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and another will gird you and carry you where you do not wish.” This He spoke, signifying by what death he would glorify God. And when He had spoken this, He said to him, “Follow Me.”

    How magnificent. He redeems Peter and informs him that he will in fact have an opportunity to DIE for him and he will not fail.
    Brings tears to my eyes.

    Leave a comment:


  • RJ Mac
    replied
    Great discussion, may I add to the mix these thoughts.

    Simon means Listening; Peter means Stone;
    Jesus changes Simon to Peter why? Because Peter was not one to listen
    he had rocks in his ears, he was spiritually deaf. Peter spoke before he
    thought. "They will never kill you Lord!" "Get behind me Satan!"
    "Call me to walk on the water!" Then he began to sink.
    "I'll never deny you Lord!" He denies Him 3 times.

    Now in Jn.21 lo and behold what Jesus calls Peter - Simon, Son of Jonah,
    Simon - are you listening now Peter? Do you hear Me?

    Do you Agapa Me? Yes Lord, I Phileo You! Tend My lambs.
    Do you Agapa Me? Yes Lord, you know I Phileo You. Shepherd My sheep.
    Do you Phileo Me? Lord You know all things, You know I Phileo You. Tend My sheep.

    Peter was not quick to jump and put his foot in his mouth and confess he Agapas Jesus.
    Peter was grieved possibly because he realized what Jesus was asking him.
    Peter knew his love wasn't what it needed to be but in time Peter uses
    Agapa in his letters. His love grew from Phileo to Agapa.

    May our love grow as Peter's did for our Lord and if asked by Him one day
    if we Agapa Him, may we with confidence say Yes Lord I Agapa You.
    May our actions always reflect our heart.

    As for do you love Me more than these, I would say He was referring to the fish.
    Do we love Christ more than our jobs, do we work harder at our jobs than
    we do for Christ? Do we love our paychecks more than Christ?

    Thanks for stirring such convicting thoughts.

    RJ

    Leave a comment:


  • RoadWarrior
    replied
    Good question, good discussion! Here are some scriptures to ponder.

    Jesus calls all Christians to "agape" love one another.

    Jn 13:34-35
    34 A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another; as I have loved you, that you also love one another. 35 By this all will know that you are My disciples, if you have love for one another."
    NKJV

    And the definition of "agape" love is given in 1 Corinthians 13.

    1 Co 13:4-8
    4 Love suffers long and is kind; love does not envy; love does not parade itself, is not puffed up; 5 does not behave rudely, does not seek its own, is not provoked, thinks no evil; 6 does not rejoice in iniquity, but rejoices in the truth; 7 bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things.
    8 Love never fails.

    NKJV

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by Diolectic View Post
    "Yes, peter, I know you denied me, however, even if you only like Me, feed my sheep."

    ............

    If you have self doubt, God is greater than our heart, and knows all things.(1John 3:20)
    Thanks brother, that was the conclusion I was trying to remember.

    Great end answer too!

    Peace,
    Joe

    Leave a comment:


  • brant
    replied
    i dont know why the word change the third time, but i have been wondering myself. i have been doing a study on love which includes this passage. im not sure of the difference between agape and phileo but i have found that they seem to be each one used in different ways for example:

    john 3:19 "this is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil." nasb

    according to the alexandrian greek text, the word "loved" here was translated from the greek word "agape". so we see that men "agape" the darkness. also:

    john 5:20 "for the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and will show Him greater works than these, so that you will marvel." nasb

    according to the alexandrian greek text, the word "loves" here was translated from the greek word "phileo". so we see that the Father "phileo" the Son.

    the reason i bring this up is because i often hear people say that "agape" is God's divine unconditional love. if this is so, why do men "agape" the darkness, their deeds being evil?

    i also hear people say that "phileo" is a lesser form of love and does not match God's love, but yet the Father "phileo" the Son.

    with this said please look again at john 21:15-17.

    like i said before, i dont know the answer, but you guys may come up with an answer. i'll keep checking in with you because i would "agape" to know.

    i also want to say it is very encouraging for me to see you studying this. if i come up with something else, i'll let you know. i hope i was a help. i "agape" you and "phileo" you.
    your brother in Christ, brant

    Leave a comment:


  • Vhayes
    replied
    My thoughts may be waaaaayyyyyy off but this is what those verses say to me.

    Here’s some questions I’m working on.

    Why would you think Jesus changed the word?
    Because He knew Peter was no yet ready to love Him with a perfect love. The Holy Spirit had not yet been sent to indwell believers, so even though Peter had spent his days with the Lord and did indeed love Him as dearly as a brother, he didn't love Jesus with a perfect, God the Holy Spirit love.

    I've sometimes wondered if this was something Peter remembered as he was indwelled by the Holy Spirit and he had a "light-bulb" moment - "So THAT'S what He meant..."

    Why would it affect Peter so deeply, was this the reason for his grief?

    I believe his grief was due to shame at his denials of Christ and here he was, looking the Lord in the eye, having to remember the denials all over again.
    In effect, Jesus gave him this opportunity as a "confession", so his conscience could be clear and his standing with the Lord would be on solid ground again.

    When Jesus said “more than these” is he talking about the disciples or is it the fish? *yes seriously*

    Clueless - but it could certainly have been the fish... look at Esau.

    Is there a lesson for us in Him changing the word?

    Yep - He will never ask more of us than we can either bear OR understand.

    Thoughts on this passage in general??

    The biggest lesson to me (and this may be JUST me) is three questions - not one, not two but three - the Trinity.

    Thanks for this thread - it has made me think a bit!
    V

    Leave a comment:


  • Biastai
    replied
    Originally posted by Walstib View Post
    I read of this and was thinking about it, I would think it does tie in here somewhere.

    I was thinking fish alot because Peter when back to work , I am thinking that's what is going on in the first part of the chapter. Maybe like a reference to... what were you doing there instead of feeding my Lambs in the first question. Pondering....

    Peace,
    Joe
    You could be on to something there.

    "He called out to them, 'Friends, haven't you any fish?'
    'No,' they answered."
    John 21:5

    "Friends, haven't you any fish?" = You haven't started establishing my church yet? They confess they have not.

    "Simon Peter climbed aboard and dragged the net ashore. It was full of large fish, 153, but even with so many the net was not torn."
    John 21:11

    C. T. Craig wrote that the fact that the net did not break is significant in that the church would not lose its stability even upon expansive growth. I'm wondering about that number 153. The author of John is not someone to insert a random number which doesn't symbolize anything.

    I could just be on a totally different wavelength as you, however. The John gospel is a glaring weakpoint in my Bible knowledge (not like its strong elsewhere though! ).

    Leave a comment:


  • Walstib
    replied
    Originally posted by Biastai View Post
    Wow, thank you.

    So if I have this straight...

    1st time, Jesus-agape, Peter-phileo
    2nd time, Jesus-agape, Peter-phileo
    3rd time, Jesus-phileo, Peter-phileo
    Yep, and another thing with the fish and the question... with agape there are two meanings that differ a bit if it is things or people. Second use is Jesus Himself so that is the person def I would think. Fish or deciples makes a different possibility for the first use. ????

    G25
    agapaō
    Thayer Definition:
    1) of persons
    1a) to welcome, to entertain, to be fond of, to love dearly
    2) of things
    2a) to be well pleased, to be contented at or with a thing
    Part of Speech: verb
    A Related Word by Thayer’s/Strong’s Number: perhaps from agan (much) [or compare G5368]
    Citing in TDNT: 1:21, 5

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X