As a cradle Catholic but later-in-life vocation, I was struck some years ago when I initially learned of the two different verbs for “love” employed in the dialogue between Jesus and Peter on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias (also known as the Sea of Galilee) in the final post-resurrection appearance recounted in the Gospel According to John (21:1-22).

While prominent English translations sufficiently convey the connections between Peter’s threefold denial (18:15-18, 25-27) and his subsequent threefold profession of love for Jesus (21:15-17), as recognized by prominent Church Fathers such as Ambrose, Augustine and John Chrysostom, they tend not to reflect the use of the different verbs for “love” in the Greek text.

Consideration of the parallels between these two passages, along with the variation in the verbs for “love” and other relevant contextual information, illuminates important pastoral insights for Christian discipleship embodied in John 21:15-22.

Since scholarly opinions diverge on the significance of the variation in verbs in the passage — namely, whether the variation affects the intended meaning of the text — I will look at this aspect of the passage first, drawing upon “data” from the text and contexts, before proceeding to the lessons on discipleship.

A Close Look at the Text

The first two questions that Jesus poses to Peter employ the Greek verb agapaō, the cognate verb for the noun agapē. In contrast, all of Peter’s responses utilize the Greek verb phileō, as does Jesus’ final question.

That there is significant overlap in the semantic range of the verbs provides a substantial basis for those who argue that John uses the verbs interchangeably. The issue at hand, however, is to determine whether John uses these verbs interchangeably in 21:15-17.

In this regard, even the Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature — the standard reference for New Testament Greek, commonly called BDAG after the initials of its various editors — seems to be divided. The portion of BDAG’s entry for the verb agapaō that specifically addresses the use of the two verbs in John 21:15-17 sums up the work of several scholars by stating that agapaō and phileō “may be used interchangeably here” based on (what they consider to be) a frequent “interchange of synonyms” elsewhere “in the same chapter” (BDAG, 5b).

On the other hand, the same lexicon’s entry for phileō acknowledges that “some think that here” phileō “seems to be =” to agapaō, before going on to observe, “but a more intimate relationship may be implied; one can extend ‘love’ in general, but close friendship is limited” (BDAG, 1056b).

Because arguments either for or against differences in the Evangelist’s intended meaning of agapaō and phileō in John 21:15-17 are indeterminate on strictly lexical grounds, recourse to additional data from the text and context is both valuable and necessary.

As part of the setting for this dialogue between Jesus and Peter at the Sea of Tiberias, John informs us that the disciples “saw a charcoal fire [anthrakia]” (21:9) when they disembarked from the boat, recalling the Evangelist’s earlier observation that Peter had been standing beside a “charcoal fire [anthrakia]” (18:18) when he denied Jesus for the second and third times. That these are the only occurrences of the term anthrakia in the New Testament increases the strength of this allusion. Furthermore, the dialogue that ensues after Peter’s threefold profession of his love for Jesus, in which Jesus twice commands Peter, “Follow me” (21:19, 22), recalls Jesus’ prediction of Peter’s triple denial (13:36-38) and so makes a complementary connection with the denial and the love-profession passages.

Jesus’ statement during the Last Supper that the disciples could not come with him at the present time (13:33) had captured Peter’s attention and ultimately led to his brash profession that he would lay down his life for Jesus (13:37). That Jesus would go on to state that “No one has greater love [agapē] than this, that someone would lay down his life for his friends” (15:13) provides significant support for identifying agapaō with greater love through this use of its cognate noun. It also identifies Peter’s profession of the same action (i.e., laying down his life for Jesus) a short time before as an expression of his exemplary love for Jesus.

In complementary fashion, Matthew recounts Peter responding to Jesus’ prediction that all would be scattered that night by distinguishing himself from the rest of the apostles, saying, “if all should fall, I will never fall” (Mt 26:33). The fact that this contextual information from Matthew 26:31-33 corresponds with John 13:37 in light of the complementary verses mentioned above provides a substantial basis for recognizing Peter’s interchanges with Jesus in John 13:36-38 and 21:15-17 as addressing the topic of his greater, or greatest, love for Jesus. That the combination of these passages also clarifies and illuminates Jesus’ initial question to Peter by the Sea of Tiberias — “do you love me more than these?” — by identifying “these” as the other six disciples (with at least four of them being apostles) provides further support for this assertion.

The threefold occurrences of the verb “follow” in 13:36-37 and 21:19-22 — along with an intervening occurrence when Peter and another disciple follow Jesus into the high priest’s garden (18:15) — provide an additional connection between these passages.

A final aspect of the data relates to the overall usage of agapaō and phileō in the Gospel of John. Whereas John uses agapaō almost three times as much as phileō in the Gospel as a whole, the latter occurs more than the former in 21:15-17 (see chart). Based on their respective usages in the Gospel as a whole, the odds against John using phileō is nearly 3 to 1, so that random selection of phileō 5 out of 9 times over agapaō by the Evangelist is highly unlikely. Moreover, that John uses agapaō a total of 21 times in chapters 13 through 15, compared to just one use of phileō, also makes the argument that John uses these verbs interchangeably for stylistic variation highly unlikely if not untenable.

Therefore, although some scholars explain the variation of agapaō and phileō in 21:15-17 as a stylistic variation of synonymous verbs that has no effect on the intended meaning of the passage, it’s clear the data suggest otherwise.

What This Means for Us

An additional detail in 21:17 that does not appear in the New American Bible translation but can be seen in many other translations provides further support for the case that the variation between the verbs affects the intended meaning of the passage. When phileō occurs in Jesus’ third question rather than agapaō, John observes that “Peter felt hurt because he said to him the third time, ‘Do you love me?’ (NRSVCE, emphasis added). This time Jesus uses the verb phileō, to which Peter responds, “Lord, you know everything; you know that I love you,” also using phileō. Therefore, the Greek text implies that Peter’s grief was not simply due to Jesus asking the question “a third time” (as it appears in the NAB), but due to Jesus’ use of phileō in the third question. Although grieved by Jesus’ question, Peter responds with phileō for the third and final time and, after Peter’s response, Jesus signifies “by what kind of death [Peter] would glorify God” and says to Peter, “Follow me” (21:19).

As indicated above, Jesus’ command to Peter to follow him connects this passage with both Peter’s earlier profession that he would lay down his life for Jesus and — supported by the distinctive New Testament uses of anthrakia — with the verb’s occurrence in 18:15, when Peter followed Jesus into the high priest’s even though Jesus had told him earlier, “you cannot follow me now, though you will follow later” (13:36).

Peter, however, ignored Jesus’ warning that he did have the capacity or the power at that time, and he “followed Jesus” (18:15) even after Jesus instructed the cohort that came to arrest him to “let these men go” (18:8).

That Jesus’ earlier prediction about Peter not being able to follow Jesus had come true beside a charcoal fire explains why John included this otherwise obscure detail in describing the encounter at the Sea of Tiberias. It enables his audience to understand why Peter did not respond to Jesus’ first two questions with the same verb Jesus used, and why Peter was grieved when Jesus changed his verb in the third question to correspond with Peter’s first two responses, expressing Jesus’ recognition that Peter was unable to respond with the verb agapaō.

Whereas Peter had professed that he would lay down his life for Jesus and soon after Jesus had equated such an act with the greatest love by using the cognate noun (agapē) of the verb agapaō, Peter now recognizes his inability to profess such love of his own accord. However, by immediately speaking about how Peter’s death would glorify God (21:18-19; cf. 13:31-32), and then instructing Peter to follow him (cf. 15:8), Jesus establishes that Peter is now able to follow Jesus as a faithful disciple.

The combination of the text and relevant contexts of John 21:15-22 collectively provide a substantial scriptural basis for the invaluable pastoral insight that Jesus loves us just the way we are, but that he loves us too much to leave us that way.

In John 21:15-22, Jesus meets Peter where he is, with Peter’s self-confidence eroded due to his denials, and foretells that Peter would demonstrate the great love for Jesus that he had earlier professed but was unable to fulfill on his own. He would fulfill his bold profession of love by following Jesus’ command after receiving the Holy Spirit from him (20:21-23).

That Peter had previously not listened to Jesus and followed of his own accord and failed attests to the fundamental importance of regular prayer for Christians (or, preferably, constant prayer [see Lk 18:1; 2 Thes 5:17]), especially prayer with the Scripture, in order to grow in our capacity to listen to the voice of the Good Shepherd and follow where he leads (Jn 10:4, 27) rather than going it on our own.

Like Peter, we will be able to follow Jesus where he leads us by relying on his power and love, renewed in us through regular participation in the sacraments, rather than relying on ourselves. In this way we can follow Jesus with the confidence and peace (Jn 14:27) that he desires for us, loving Jesus by keeping his commandments (14:21, 23), including his new commandment to love one another as he loves us (15:12). We can actively cooperate with his work of perfecting his love (1 Jn 2:5; 4:12) and his likeness within us (Mt 5:48) as we glorify the Father by bearing much fruit by increasingly becoming his disciples (Jn 15:8). 

FATHER NATHANAEL POLINSKI, OSB, is a monk of St. Vincent Archabbey as well as an associate professor of Scripture and Biblical Languages and the academic dean of St. Vincent Seminary, Latrobe, Pennsylvania.