From: Steve Godfrey (sgodfrey@irk.ru)
Date: Wed Jan 17 2001 - 00:08:29 EST
<x-html>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4
: Sat Apr 20 2002 - 15:36:47 EDT
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=windows-1252" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2314.1000" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>Dear Carl and
list,</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>I greatly
appreciate the help you, Steven, and others have given me in thinking through
John 21. I needed some time to percolate, and life always intervenes, so
my response is probably coming well after everyone else has considered the horse
dead and beaten. However, I thought it best to clarify my own thinking,
and then offer this for considered review:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>I think we've
reached general consensus on the following points:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>1) the
synonymns, particularly AGAPAO / FILEO, are present for more than stylistic
variation</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>2) the
general usage of AGAPAO and FILEO in the NT provide no justification for reading
AGAPAO as a higher love and FILEO as a lower love. This is to commit a
root fallacy, and with FILEO, to commit a semantic anachronism (by letting
"Philadelphia", the city of brotherly love, guide the
discussion).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>3) Context
must be the primary factor in determining how we understand the differences
intended in this passage.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>You suggested that
reading FILEO as the stronger term provides a more satisfactory reading.
Your justifications were that this provides "a positive climax of warm mutual
acceptance," and that this reading fits well with Raymond Brown's suggestion of
the NT as a working out of mutual understanding between the Petrine and
Johannine communities. </SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001>I don't yet find these justifications persuasive.
First, the reading I offered seems to provide an even more satisfactory climax
than yours does (grace resolving shame). Second, while I greatly respect
Raymond Brown's scholarship, I don't see how this bears on taking FILEO as
stronger than AGAPE. </SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001>You might appropriately ask at this point, "What then
are the real justifications for your interpretation?" I particularly at
this point appreciate Steven De Vullo's sentiments. It is indeed important
not to read our preconceptions and agendas into the passage. Here then are
my justifications for taking AGAPAO as the stronger term:</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001>a) <FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001>the semantic domain of AGAPAO centers around
the idea
of love based on unconditional high regard, while that of FILEO centers on love
based on association (per Louw&Nida). (I base this not on my inherent
regard for Louw&Nida, but rather on a review of the NT occurences of AGAPAO
and FILEO, which in my view justifies their treatment.)
</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>b) </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT
face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>I disagree, nevertheless, with
Louw&Nida's argument that no difference of meaning between these synonyms is
intended in John 21, based on your summary of John's style ("simplicity masking
massive depth"), as well as the function of John 21 (as an epilogue), as well as
Peter's urging in his first epistle to "shepherd the flock of God" (1 Pet.
5:2). Regarding this last point, these are the words of a man deeply
committed to personal holiness and ministry inspired by shame resolved by
grace. </SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT
face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT
face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>c) It is probable that Peter was
experiencing significant shame at the beginning of John 21. He had
betrayed Christ 3 times in front of a little girl. His friend John was
there to see the whole thing. I believe this to be the implication John
intends when he has Peter say in 21:3, "I'm going out to fish." Peter is
going back to what he knew before, because he is confused about what he has come
to know subsequently.</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>d) If shame is the operative
dynamic, then it makes more sense to treat AGAPAO as the stronger term.
When Jesus moves from AGAPAO to FILEO, it seems most probable he is providing
for the resolution of Peter's shame.</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>Steven De Vullo voiced concern earlier
that the implication of this interpretation would be to inflict on congregations
ministers with defective love commitments, and therefore it can't be the correct
interpretation. First of all, I am hesitant to revise an interpretation,
if it is appropriately justified by inductive reasoning, merely because the
implication might be uncomfortable. Uncomfortable implications are often
the most helpful ones. Second, I don't think in any case that Steven's
concern follows. The reading I'm suggesting in no way lowers the standard
of love required for ministers. Rather, it compels ministers to the
standard of love embodied in Jesus' gracious seeking out of Peter after a
profound personal failure on Peter's part.
</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>With
appreciation,</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001></SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>Steve
Godfrey</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001><FONT face=Verdana
size=2><SPAN class=250301504-17012001>Irkutsk, Siberia (via Milwaukee,
WI)</SPAN></FONT></SPAN></FONT><FONT face=Verdana size=2><SPAN
class=250301504-17012001><FONT size=2></DIV></FONT></SPAN></FONT>
---<BR>
B-Greek home page: http://metalab.unc.edu/bgreek
You are currently subscribed to b-greek as: [jwrobie@mindspring.com]<BR>
To unsubscribe, forward this message to leave-b-greek-327Q@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
To subscribe, send a message to subscribe-b-greek@franklin.oit.unc.edu<BR>
<BR>
</BODY></HTML>
</x-html>