The sky is blue, the roses red and birds are singing, I feel like myself again today. What I mean is I don't feel TIRED. Its actually rather gray outside this morning but I know the blue is coming. I'm curled up looking out the window starting the day with my bible, two chubby chickens looking for the dog's bowl on the far end of the porch just walked by the window accompanied by strains of my neighbor practicing some very good piano playing. I've been finishing what I started last post in my mind the past few days, so now I'm going to take the time to write it down, which helps me think.
It started a really long time ago, sometime in the early part of this year, I was standing at the kitchen scrubbing away when a name came to my mind. Sometimes the sound of a name seems to entertain my ears and it repeats over and over in my head as though my mind was tossing it against the wall and back in play. I just sit back and listen, I find it rather interesting that my mind enjoys certain sounds so much. This time though there was a difference, I felt like I should really listen to the name instead of just the sound, so I googled it. Yes, the almighty google revealed to me that this name was a person I must have heard talked about at some time in my life, probably when Ben worked in a little church as its youth pastor way back at the beginning in the early 90s. Winkie Pratney Winkie Pratney Winkie Pratney...he wrote quite a few books, but the site said his best seller was a book called "The Nature and Character of God." One punch of a keyboard key with wet fingers and there it was at my door in a brown book box, and I have been devouring it ever since.
I can't vouch for his theology on every single point, I don't feel the need to in case you decide to look for yourself, but what I have found here is an anthology of writings of the church fathers from antiquity to the present day contemplating the nature and character of God. How interesting, since His nature and character were something I had been questioning myself, impertinent sinner that I am. I was, am being, challenged to reconsider, the most august of all Kings inviting one of the lowliest of scullery maids to consider His glory. It shames me even as I write that.
I now force myself to stay focused because I want to reprint chunks of the current chapter I am reading called God is Loving. This follows the chapters God is Uncreated, Infinite, Spiritual,Glorious, and Creator. Do you think He is trying to set me straight somehow? First the teacher and then the time! Maybe it had to be because I have been gifted in the area of stubbornness, but I wonder if you have noticed as I have that one's gift used wrongly can become one's downfall. I'm afraid I don't flex like a good piece of clay must, which is okay if I'm in a completed shape, but deadly to the Potter's dreams of making something beautiful if I am far from done. Hopefully I am not the only one out there with this fault because there goes that measuring stick again.
So the point for today is really just a comparison between two words, phileo and agapao, both of which mean love in ancient Greek. There are many different English words which describe the many facets of love too...affection, compassion, benevolence, infatuation, etc. It makes a difference don't you think?
Phileo love is commonly understood as a love between siblings, a shared affection between friends, the kindness of one human being to another, "a love of liking, and affection for someone or something that is the outgoing of one's heart in delight to that which affords pleasure." This is the word Peter used to answer Jesus when He asked if Peter loved Him in John 21:15-19.
The problem in the exchange was that Jesus asked Peter if he "agapao"ed Him, not "pileo"ed Him. He pressed the point, He wanted Peter to understand his own heart because I'm sure the Lord wasn't asking something He didn't already know. Agapao love is translated "to show love; it is a giving, active love on the other's behalf", or "It is a love called out of a person's heart by an 'awakened sense of value in an object which causes one to prize it'. It's impulse comes from prizing."
The main difference I see here is what draws the love from the heart, the delight or pleasure that the object of love brings to you, or the placing of intrinsic value on that object of love because of what it IS, not necessarily for how it makes you feel about it. Books have been written, I can only try to take from this what I can that helps me see my own heart in a truer light today. What is my own love for God based on? What drew it out of my heart in the first place? What sustains it today? In the beginning God created for me a way to eternal life and I loved Him for that. Along the way He has been faithful to me, shown me care in practical needs and desires met, and I have loved Him for that. He has saved me from great suffering, even death, times when I knew it and I'm sure many times I have been unaware, and I have loved Him for that.
What category would I place this kind of love into, phileo or agapao? Nothing is so black and white you say, and I agree, but for the most part, which one? He has delighted me, He has given me a great deal of pleasure by His care and blessings along the way. But I see here in the exchange with Peter that He would like to have the other like He gives, a love that values the intrinsic qualities of the object loved so much that the absence of tangible pleasure associated with it does not change the sacrifices one will make, it's just that valuable. So do I love God when He does not answer my prayers? Do I love Him when He allows suffering, disappointment, loneliness? Do I love Him when I simply cannot understand what He is doing, or not doing for me? In other words, does the absence of pleasure or delight change how I feel about my Creator?
In reflection I am seeing that one love is more fully developed than the other. Shall we say mature, or more precious like a good wine that has improved with age? Having been married for almost a quarter of a century I can see how married love gives insight into the difference and the progression from one kind to the other. At first love there is the excitement of becoming one, of being lost in someone else's universe, of being adored and the focused object of someone's attention. But time adds distractions, responsibilities, sickness, children, mortages, etc. Hopefully at this time love has matured to a deeper appreciation not for what you receive from your spouse only, but also for who they have shown themselves to be in action, in faithfulness, in perseverance and in character. You've had a front row seat for a long time, and can you now love them as much for who they are as much as for how much pleasure you receive from their company? When applied to my love for God then, how would I answer Jesus if He asked me if I love HIm? Would I be able to answer back that I agapao Him, or would my honest answer have to be "I phileo You Lord"?
If I lost you a long time ago don't worry, I'm thinking out loud. If this speaks to your heart as it does mine, then I hope you will have a small window of time to sit alone and look at the sky and think about your own love for God... phileo or agapao?
No comments:
Post a Comment