What is God? – ‘God is love’.  What are the greatest commandments? – ‘Love God with everything you have, and love your neighbout as yourself’.  What is the greatest thing? – ‘Love’.

Armed with such majestic statements, it is easy to slip into a mentality which says, ‘Love is not only the greatest thing: it is the only thing (that really matters)’.

One practical consequence is that evangelism is reduced to ‘sharing the love of God/Jesus’.  But curiously, the Book of Acts (which, of course, records the evangelistic outreach of the early church) never describes the good news of Christ in such terms.

This is by no means to despise or demean the place of ‘love’ in Christian thinking and practice.  But it does suggest that we need to take a careful look at what we mean by it.

And that’s where this post, by Ian Paul, is very helpful.  What follows is based on that article, with direct quotes indicated in the usual way.

When people (including Christian people) use the word ‘love’ these days, there alarmingly little overlap with its meaning within the pages of the New Testament.

According to popular preaching and writing, the Greek language has four words for ‘love’, and agapē is the word reserved for selfless, divine, Christ-like love.  Back in the 1930s, Anders Nygren published his book Agape and Eros, in which he sought to distinguish between the former, which denotes self-giving love, with the latter, which is acquisitive love.  C.S. Lewis argues something similar, in his The Four Loves, but on different grounds.

James Barr pushed back at this kind of word-study approach, arguing that we must pay more attention to usage-in-context and the semantic range of a word, rather than simply attach an entire theology to the word itself.

Truth is, that agapē (and the related verb agapaō) are often used in quite ordinary ways in the New Testament.  Ian Paul offers the following examples:

• Demas deserts Paul because he ‘loved this present age’ (agapaō 2 Tim 4:10).
• The Pharisees ‘love’ the best seats in the synagogue (agapaō Luke 11:43).
• People ‘loved the darkness rather than the light’ (agapaō John 3:19).

None of these is selfless or divine.

In the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the OT, the verb is used for romantic and even sexual attachment.

• Isaac loves Rebekah (Heb ’ahav Gr agapaō Gen 24:67).
• Jacob loves Rachel (Gen 29:18, 30).
• Amnon ‘loves’ Tamar before he rapes her (Heb ’ahav Gr agapaō 2 Sam 13:1, 15).

And in John’s Gospel agapaō and phileō appear to alternate with little difference of meaning: the Father ‘loves’ the Son with agapaō in John 3:35 and with phileō in 5:20.

(Reformatted)

So, ‘love’, both in its English and its Greek forms, look surprisingly similar.  They ertainly share a common core:

‘Both denote a positive orientation of one person toward another person or thing, one that values it and seeks it. Both can describe an inner disposition and the actions that flow from it. Both apply to divine and human relationships, to family, friends and community.’

But, in English usage, lighter sense of ‘love’ have come to predominate, and tend to shape what comes to mind when we hear the word.  We often apply it to romantic relationships (‘falling in love’ ) and to sexual intimacy (‘making love’, which, a few generations ago referred to ‘courting’).  But classical Greek reserved erōs for that, and the NT avoids that word-group altogether.

So, when we read ‘love one another’, we hear something altogether softer and more private.  For us, ‘love’ is primarily something we feel (involuntarily), rather than something we do.

‘Biblical love, shaped by Hebrew ʾahăbâ, is weighted toward loyalty and commitment.’

It has been shown that:

‘‘love’ in Deuteronomy belongs with the language of ancient Near Eastern treaties. ‘Love the LORD your God’ (Deut 6:5) sits alongside fearing him, serving him and keeping his commandments.’

Such love can be commanded, whereas a loving feeling cannot.  Such love can choose; it can prefer one over another (cf. Deut 7:7f; Mal 1:2f; Rom 9:13; Lk 14:26).  Such love prompts obedience (Jn 14:14; 1 Jn 5:3); this in contrast to contemporary culture, where:

‘love is often set against rules and obligation, as if commands were the enemy of love rather than its expression.’

Where ‘love’ in modern English usage differs most sharply from the biblical concept is that the former is often indulgent.  It affirms the other’s choices, makes no demands, sets no boundaries.  ‘If you really loved me, you would let me…’  Biblical love, on the others hand, seeks the other’s good; and this may run directly contrary to what they want.  See 1 Cor 13:6; Heb 12:6; Rev 3:19.

Further: in modern parlance ‘love’ is essentially passive and individual, whereas biblical love actively builds community, 1 Cor 8:1.  The description of ‘love’ in 1 Cor 13 consists almost entirely of verbs.

The meaning of ‘love’ comes, not from a dictionary, but from a story – the story of what God has done in Christ, 1 Jn 3:16; 4:10.  This is abundantly clear in the account of Jesus washing the disciples’ feet (Jn 13).  It begins with a statement about the love of Jesus (Jn 13:1), and leads to a commandment that they should love one another, Jn 13::34.  Such love involves (a) a reversal of status, (b) is not indulgent; and (c) takes the form of service (cf. Gal 5:13).

If ‘love’ has been cheapened in modern usage, then we should not seek to abolish the word, but perhaps qualify it (‘costly love’; ‘self-giving love’) and define it by example (as in Jn 13).  Or, instead of asking, ‘How can I love these people?’ ask, ‘How can I serve them?’

And so we shall learn to love as Jesus loved – with a love that ‘commits, chooses, corrects, and kneels to serve’.

I found Ian Paul’s article to be a helpful and important corrective to our loose thinking about Christian love.

I do think that a bit more needs to be said about the affective aspect of love (note how readily the mourners a Lazarus’ tomb inferred from Jesus’ tears the strength of his love for his friend).  But I know that Ian doesn’t disagree with this (‘cos he told me!).

Also, there is more to be said about the relationship between divine love and the practice of evangelism.  If ‘sharing the love of God/Jesus’ is inadequate as a definition, how then should we think and speak of God’s love towards sinners?  But no-one can cover everything in a single blog post, so I’ll leave it there.