Thread: John 21:15-17
View Single Post
Old 06-23-2008, 03:19 PM   #3
Archaea
Assistant to the Regional Manager
 
Archaea's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Orgasmatron
Posts: 24,338
Archaea is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by All-American View Post
My Greek teacher for my gospel of John class insists that there is no significance behind the slight variation of the words. Both the words "agapw" and "philew" are used in the Gospel of John to describe how the Father feels about the Son, and therefore there is no need to assume that philia is somehow a lesser form of love. His basic reasoning is that these are tricola, a rhetorical device wherein a certain element is repeated three times. You can expect variatio just to help the flow along, but you can nevertheless treat any elements that are nearly synonymous as synonymous.

To be honest, I don't know that I completely agree. But when a PhD in Classics argues it, it's worth at least bringing up in the conversation before you disagree with it. I think the differences are at least a little significant, but perhaps we overplay it.

As far as Peter being troubled or grieved, I always thought it was because he remembered denying Christ three times, and realized the connection between the three-time denial and the three-time confession.
Not having any significant training, or any training in Greek whatsoever, a smarter man would bow out at this juncture, but nobody's ever accused me of being wise.

My responses are merely observations.

First, Christ and the apostles probably spoke in Aramaic or Hebrew, so the changes are changes which the gospelist desired to emphasize, so it could just be a form of "elegant variation". If that's all it is, then so be it.

Second, Greeks appeared very sensitive to changes in word, grammar and other aspects, so it would surprise me that the writer intended to convey no nuance by the shift.

Perhaps your instructor is correct, but you now have a God speaking to his friends in very grand terms using agapw, shifting at the end to philew when his friends is trembling. Perhaps no sense is intended, but under the circumstances I could see why the speaker and receiver would sense otherwise.

Philew seems more subservient in Peter's usage, but then again, this is coming from the Greek village idiot.
__________________
Ἓν οἶδα ὅτι οὐδὲν οἶδα
Archaea is offline   Reply With Quote