21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, do you love me more than these do?” He replied, “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus said a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus said a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed that Jesus asked him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus replied, “Feed my sheep.

In the first two of our Lord’s questions, agapao is used. In the third, phileo is employed. In each of his answers, Peter uses phileo.

Is the variation significant?

Some commentators (e.g Hendriksen) think so: agapao being, in their eyes, a higher form of love than phileo.

The supposed distinction is more common in popular preaching and writing, such as this:

‘Unfortunately, the English translation does not fully capture the drama of this story and thus, we must look to the original Greek. The Greeks had three words for our word, “Love”: Philia (Friendship), Eros (Sexual Love), and Agape (Selfless, Gift-Love). In the context of this story, Jesus asks Peter, “Do you Agape me?” In his shame, Peter can only respond, “I Philia you” or “I am your friend.” While Jesus loves Peter with his whole heart, Peter is a wounded human. On the third try, Jesus meets Peter at his level and asks if they are friends. To this, Peter can agree.’

See also this post, which asks:

‘Why the difference in words for “love” in this conversation? Why did Jesus use agape and Peter use phileo? Jesus was asking Peter if he loved him with the love of God…

‘Jesus twice asked Peter, “Do you agape me?…Peter, on the other hand, still felt the sting of having denied Jesus, and was hopeful that their friendship was intact. Did Jesus hold Peter’s denial against him? Would he still treat Peter as a close associate and companion? Peter was not sure where he stood with Jesus, so he was trying to let Jesus know that he was still a true friend, and had phileo love for Jesus.

The third time Jesus spoke to Peter, he came to Peter’s level and asked if Peter were indeed a true friend (phileo), which grieved Peter…’

So also the devotional writer F.B. Meyer:

‘There are two Greek words for “love.” In his questions our Lord chose the higher, while Peter in his replies humbly chose the lower till in his third question our Lord came down to his level.’ (Through the Bible Day By Day)

However, in the NT these words are often used interchangeably, and it is probably wrong to attach any special meaning to their varied use here.  In John’s Gospel, the two words are used interchangeably in expressions such as ‘the disciple whom Jesus loved’, ‘the Father loves the Son’, and ‘Jesus loved Lazarus’.  Compare, also, Jn 3:35 with Jn 5:20.  John is especially prone to introducing slight variations in repetitions without.  Within the present passage, John uses three other pairs: bosko and poimaino (‘feed’ and ‘take care of’ the sheep); arnia and probata (‘lambs’ and ‘sheep’); and oida and ginosko (‘you know’, v17): as Carson drily remarks, ‘These have not stirred homiletical imaginations; it is difficult to see why the first pair should.’

The following discussion is sensible:

‘Two Greek words are used for love, and perhaps there is an intentional contrast—agapan the highest spiritual feeling (15:9–13), used in the Lord’s first two questions; philein, of natural affection, used always by Peter and in the Lord’s third question, St. Peter using the humbler word and the Lord accepting that. But both words are applied to the disciple whom Jesus loved (20:2, 21:20) and to Lazarus (11:5, 36), so that it is doubtful whether the distinction is to be pressed.’ (A New Commentary on Holy Scripture)

Kruse agrees:

‘Agapaō and phileō are used synonymously in the Fourth Gospel. For example, both agapaō and phileō are used of the Father’s love for the Son (10:17; 15:9; 17:23, 24, 26/5:20), Jesus’ love for Lazarus (Jn 11:5/11:3, 36), the disciple whom Jesus loved (Jn 13:23; 19:26; 21:7, 20/20:2), and the Father’s love for the disciples (Jn 14:23/16:27).’

Milne adds:

‘The likelihood that no major distinctions are intended is rendered the more credible by the lack of a clear consensus among those who want to make a distinction. It is probably therefore wiser to see this as a Johannine stylistic feature rather than as the basis of a major exegetical truth.’

See this discussion by Ian Paul.

Note that Peter is distressed, not because Jesus used a weaker word for ‘love on the third occasion, but because he asked him three times if he loved him.