Agape

“So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonah, lovest thou Me more than these? He saith unto Him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love Thee. He saith unto him, Feed My lambs.” John 21:15

COME AND DINE

We are introduced here from the word of God, Christ’s discourse with Peter after dinner; so much of it as it relates to Jesus Himself in which He examines Peter’s love for Him. It was a solemn occasion, with the disciples feeling a fresh sense of awe and reverence in the presence of the Lord, showing Himself for the third time after His resurrection from the dead (John 21:14).

Jesus invited the disciples to dinner. Keeping their distance, they were afraid to ask Him, “Who art Thou?” But, because they knew it was their Lord, He called them very familiarly, “Come and dine.” (John 21:12). He treated them as friends. This kind invitation may be a call alluded to, as to show the call Christ gives to His disciples into coming with Him in grace—“All things are now ready; Come and dine.” (Matthew 8:11). It alludes also to a call of the coming glory hereafter. “Come ye blessed of my Father; come and sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob.” There is room and provision enough for all of His friends and followers.

PAINLESS

When Christ entered into a discourse with Peter, it was after they had dined; they had all eaten. Christ foresaw that what He had to say to Peter would give him some uneasiness, no doubt, and therefore would not say it until after they had dined; a wise policy. Peter was conscious, to himself, certainly, that he had incurred His Master’s displeasure, and could expect no other than to be upbraided with his treachery and ingratitude. Twice, if not thrice, he had seen his Master since His resurrection, and He said not a word to him of it. But now, at length, his Master put him out of his pain, and said what He had to say to him, and confirmed him in his place as an apostle, not as a criminal, but as a friend. The offence was not only forgiven, but forgotten, and Christ let him know that he was dear to him as ever.

The whole scene shows that Peter had already been restored in the sense of receiving forgiveness (Luke 24:34). But the leadership of an erring disciple could hardly have been accepted for the days ahead, either by Peter or his brethren, apart from Christ’s explicit indication—“Lovest thou Me?” More important than love for men is love for Christ. This is an encouraging instance of Christ’s tenderness towards penitents, and has taught us, in like manner, to restore such as are fallen with a spirit of meekness.

THREE QUESTIONS, THREE ANSWERS, THREE REPLIES

But, what was the discourse itself like? Here was the same question three times asked, the same answer three times returned, and the same reply three times given, with very little variation. Ah! And yet no vain repetition. Perhaps the same thing was repeated by our Saviour, in speaking it, the more to affect Peter and the other disciples that were present. Our Saviour often repeats passages for emphasis as well as to affect us, the listeners or readers.

Three times Christ asks Peter whether he loves Him or not. The first time the question is “Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou Me more than these?” He speaks to him by name, the more to affect him, as Luke 22:31, “Simon, Simon.” He does not call him Cephas, or Peter, but Simon Barjona, son of Jonas (or John or Johanan) the name pronounced when he was blessed (Mathew 16:17); Simon, his original name, to remind him of his extraction. Names can be precious to the hearing of those addressed.

FIRSTLY, “Lovest Thou Me?”

If we were to see whether we are Christ’s disciples indeed, this must be the enquiry, Do we love Him?

What was the reason Christ put this question to Peter? His fall had given occasion to doubt his love. We must not reckon it an affront to have our own sincerity questioned when we ourselves have done that which makes it questionable. After a shaking and a fall, we must take heed of settling too soon, lest we bottom out wrongly or settle upon a low ebb. Jesus simply asked, “Dost thou love Me?” (not fear or honour Me, or admire Me). But, give proof of this love, and the affront shall be passed by, and no more said of it. Peter, however, had professed himself a penitent; witness his tears, and his return to the society of the disciples. He was now upon his probation as a penitent. But the question is not how much hast thou wept or fasted, and afflicted your soul, but “Dost thou love Me?” This is what makes repentance acceptable. Peter needed love (agapao) to assume the pastoral office.

Before Christ would commit His sheep to his care, he asked him, “Lovest thou Me?” Christ has such a tender regard for His flock that He will not trust it with any but those that love Him.  Those that truly do not love Christ will never truly love the souls of men, or will naturally care for their state as they should; nor will that minister love his work that does not love his Master. Nothing but the love of Christ will constrain ministers to go cheerfully through the difficulties and discouragements they meet within their work (2 Corinthians 5:13–14). But, this work will make their work easy, and preaching and writing a joy—and them in good earnest in that work.

SECONDLY, “Lovest thou Me more than thou lovest these?” (GR. “pleion touton”)

The question poses or conjectures itself as: “Lovest thou Me more than thou lovest these?” More than thou love these persons—James, or John, thy intimate friends, or Andrew, thy own brother and companion? Those that do not love Christ outright, that do not love Him better than the best friend they have in the world, stand in comparison or in competition. Or more than thou (as Peter) lovest these things—these boats, and nets and pleasure of fishing, or more than the gain of fishing? Or, those only that love Christ indeed that love Him better than all the worldly delights of sense and all the profits and fame of this world; more than thou lovest these occupations thou art now employed in (Jeremiah 9:23;  Ephesians 3:8; Matthew 19:21).

“Lovest thou Me more than thou lovest these?” More than any of the rest of the disciples love Me? This question is intended to reproach Peter with his vainglorious boast; Though all men should deny Thee, yet will not I (Matthew 26:35). In essence, Christ is saying, “Are you still of the same mind?” Or, to intimate to him that he now had more reason to love Him than any of them had, as much as his sin in denying Christ was greater than theirs in forsaking Him. “Tell me therefore, which of them will love Him most?” Luke 7:42

We should all attempt to study to excel in our love for Christ. It is no breach of the peace or breach of good manners to go before others in His love.

THIRDLY, “Lovest thou Me. . . . the second and third time that Christ put this question. But, leaving out “more than these.”

Peter, in his modesty, was not willing to compare himself with his brethren. Though we cannot say, “We love Christ more than others do,” yet we shall be accepted if we can say, “We love Him indeed.”

To explain further: in verses 15–17 of John 21, whereas the three questions are asked, two different Greek verbs are used for “love”: 1) agapao (to love deeply, used of divine love in John 14:21; 5:20) and also of the love which the law demands (Luke 10:27). 2) The other verb is phileo (to be fond of; to retain a kindness for, warm affection); a love of lesser degree than agapao, as between friends, e.g. Philadelphia, PA. (City of Brotherly Love; phileo-adelphia).

In the first two instances, where the Lord asks Peter, “Lovest thou Me?” He uses agapao; but, Peter, remembering his three denials of the Lord and aware now of his own weakness, and his confidence in himself greatly shaken, feels unworthy to express his love to Christ, and does not dare to reply with as strong a word as agapao.  Instead, he employs the weaker word phileo in his reply, “Yea Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee” (fond of, affection and kindness towards). When the Lord inquires the third time, “Lovest thou Me?” Christ altered the word agapao to phileo. Peter uses the lesser word also, phileo (friend, fondness, warm affection). And again, the humbled disciple replies: “Lord, Thou knowest all things; Thou knowest that I love (phileo) Thee.”  John 21:17

Jesus now condescends to Peter’s self-evaluation, saying, in effect: “Even if you do not trust your own emotions far enough to apply the word agapao to them, you still should feed My sheep.” Our duty to Christ should depend, not upon the strength of our subjective feelings, but upon our realization of what He has done for us!

Three times Peter returns the same answer to Christ: “Yea Lord, Thou knowest that I love Thee.”  Peter does not pretend to love Christ more than the rest of the disciples did. He is now ashamed of that rash word of his: Though all men deny Thee, yet will not I (Mathew 26:35). Though we must aim to be better than others, yet we must, in lowliness of mind, esteem others better than ourselves; for we know more evil of ourselves than we do of any of our brethren. Peter made a profession of repentance for his sin, for it grieves us to have affronted one whom we love. Christ prayed that his faith might not fail (Luke 22:32), and though his faith did fail, his love did not; his love then led him to repentance. Peter was now readmitted upon repentance, to claim again his relation to Christ.

Peter appeals to Christ Himself for the proof of it: Thou knowest that I love Thee; and the third time yet more emphatically: “Thou knowest all things, Thou knowest that I love Thee” (John 21:17). He does not vouch his fellow-disciples to witness for him—they might just be deceived in him; nor does he think his own word might be taken—the credit of that was destroyed already; but he calls Christ Himself to witness.

Peter was sure Christ knew all things, and particularly that He knew the heart, and was a “discerner of the thoughts and intents of it” (John 16:30). Christ knows us better than we know ourselves. Though we know not our own uprightness, He knows it. Peter was grieved when Christ asked him the third time! “Lovest thou me?” (John 21:17). First, because it put him in mind of his three-fold denial of Christ, and was plainly designed to do so; and when he thought thereon he wept. Every remembrance of past sins, even pardoned sins, renews the sorrow of a true penitent. But, godly sorrow works carefulness and fear (2 Corinthians 7:11).

A POLICY MAN

“Being a policy man led to the denial of Christ. Do not act from motives of policy. The great danger of our businessmen and those in responsible positions is that they will be turned from Christ to secure some help aside from Him. Peter would not have been left to show such weakness and folly had he not sought, by the use of policy, to avoid reproach and scorn, persecution and abuse. His highest hopes centered in Christ; but when he saw Him in humiliation, unbelief came in and was entertained. He fell under the power of temptation, and, instead of showing his fidelity in a crisis, he wickedly denied his Lord.” –Testimonies for the Church, vol. 5, p. 427–428

FEEDERS OF THE FLOCK

Three times Christ committed the care of His flock to Peter: “Feed My lambs; feed My sheep.” The church of Christ is His flock, which He hath purchased with His own blood (Acts 20:28) and He is the Chief Shepherd of it. In this flock, some are lambs, young and tender and weak; others are sheep, grown to some strength and maturity. The Shepherd here takes care of both, and of the lambs first, for upon all occasions He shows a particular tenderness for them. He gathers the lambs in His arms, and carries them in His bosom (Isaiah 40:11).

The charge He gives Peter concerning them is to feed them. The word used in verses 15 and 17 is (GR “boske”), which strictly signifies, to give them food; but the word used in verse 16 is (GR “poimaine”) which signifies, more largely, to do all the offices of a shepherd for them: “Feed the lambs with that which is proper for them, and the sheep likewise with food convenient. The lost sheep of the house of Israel; seek and feed them, and the other sheep also which are not of this fold.

It is the duty of all Christ’s ministers to feed His lambs and sheep. Feed them, that is, teach them; for the doctrine of the gospel is spiritual food. Feed them, that is, Lead them to the green pastures, presiding in their religious assemblies, and ministering all the ordinances to them. Feed them by personal application to their respective state and case; not only lay food before them, but feed those with it that are willful and will not, or weak and cannot feed themselves. When Christ ascended on high, He gave pastors, left His flock with those that loved Him, and could take care of them for His sake.

Christ’s threefold repetition of the pronoun “My”—“My lambs”. . . “My sheep”. . . ”My sheep” (verses 15–17) reminds all Christians who hold responsibility over others that the persons under them belong, first of all, to Christ. Pastors, missionaries, workers, teachers, and parents are but under-shepherds to whose care Christ’s sheep are committed (Hebrews 13:20; 1 Peter 5:3).

WHY PETER?!

Ah! But why did He give this charge particularly to Peter? Ah! Just ask the advocates for the Pope’s supremacy and they will tell you that Christ hereby designed to give to Peter, and therefore to his successors, to the bishops of Rome, absolute dominion and headship over the whole Christian church, as if a charge to serve the sheep gave a power to lord or rule over all the shepherds; whereas, it is plain, Peter himself never claimed such a power, nor did the other disciples ever own it in him! This charge given to Peter to preach the gospel is by a strange artifice made to support the usurpation of his pretended successors that fleece the sheep, and, instead of feeding them, feed upon them!

But the particular application to Peter here was designed:

First, to restore him to his apostleship, now that he repented of his abjuration or renouncement of it, and to renew his commission, both for his own satisfaction, and for the satisfaction of his brethren.

A commission given to one convicted of a crime is supposed to amount to a pardon; no doubt, this commission given to Peter was evidence that Christ was reconciled to him, or else He would never have placed such a confidence in him. Hmmm . . . Of some that have deceived us, many say, “Though we forgive them, we will never trust them;” but Christ, when He forgave Peter, He trusted him with the most valuable treasure He had on earth.

Secondly, it was designed to quicken him to a diligent discharge of his office as an apostle. Peter was a man of a bold and zealous spirit, always forward to speak and act, and, lest he should be tempted to take upon him the directing of the shepherds, he is charged to feed the sheep, as he himself charges all the presbyters to do, and not to lord or rule over God’s heritage (1 Peter 5:2–3).

Thirdly, what Christ said to him He said to all His disciples; He charged them all, not only to be fishers of men (though that was said to Peter) (Luke 5:10) by the conversion of sinners, but feeders of the flock, by the edification of saints.

When Jesus had spoken thusly about Peter’s apostleship, suffering, and martyrdom, observing Peter, perhaps to look blank upon it, He saith unto him “Follow Me.” This word, “Follow Me,” was a further confirmation of his restoration to his Master’s favour, and to his apostleship. It was to excite him and encourage him in faithfulness and diligence in his work as an apostle. Ah! “Follow Me” led to a physical movement, but much more is implied (John 13:36). Peter was being summoned to an undeviating, faithful walk, to set his face like flint, even as Jesus had done in view of the approaching cross.

Christ had told him to “Feed the sheep.” Now, let the under-shepherds study to imitate the Chief Shepherd, saying, “Follow Me.” Still, they must follow the rules He had given them and the example He had set them. What greater encouragement could they have than this, both in service and in suffering? That herein they did follow Him and it was their present honour; who would be ashamed to follow such a leader? That hereafter they should follow Him, and that would be their future happiness; and so it is a repetition of the promise Christ had given Peter (John 13:36), “Thou shalt follow Me afterwards.”

OVERCOMERS

“The pen of inspiration, true to its task, tells us of the sins that overcame Noah, Lot, Moses, Abraham, David, and Solomon, and that even Elijah’s strong spirit sank under temptation during his fearful trial. Jonah’s disobedience and Israel’s idolatry are faithfully recorded. Peter’s denial of Christ, the sharp contention of Paul and Barnabas, the failings and infirmities of the prophets and apostles, are all laid bare by the Holy Ghost, who lifts the veil from the human heart. There before us lie the lives of the believers, with all their faults and follies, which are intended as a lesson to all the generations following them. If they had been without foible they would have been more than human, and our sinful natures would despair of ever reaching such a point of excellence. But seeing where they struggled and fell, where they took heart again and conquered through the grace of God, we are encouraged, and led to press over the obstacles that degenerate nature places in our way.” –Testimonies for the Church, vol. 4, p. 12

Those that faithfully follow Christ in grace shall certainly follow Him to glory in AGAPE. Amen!

John Theodorou

U.S.A.