I feel for me personally as I grow in my spiritual walk it is easier to understand what this type of love is and what the requirements are to obtain it .

Here in John   Jesus is questing Peter as to his love for Him ---as it was Perter who denied Jesus ----so as we go through our life we will be tested as to our love walk---when your spouse or friend betrays us we then being to question the sincerity of their love toward us and our love toward them -----

Jesus says feed and tend to - my sheep--my lambs  etc ---show me that your love is real for me ----

In this physical world showing our love to Jesus ---is fulling surrendering our life to Him ----God's word carries more  weight in our lives more than  the words of this world-- God becomes first in our lives  everything else comes after God  and that includes our spouses and children -----no matter what it looks like in any given situation in our lives trust in Jesus --God's word to carry us through the situation that has invaded our space ----God's promise is to give us strength to endure ----

We humans think what we have belongs to us ---we worked to get what we have ---we got the Job ----the money we make is our money ---the house is ours ---etc-etc--God's word says everything we have belongs to God ----God created us ---so until we reconnect to God by accepting His Son we live in this world and think like this world ----This world says everything we have belongs to us -----

So where is our priority  in the worlds way or  God's way ----the only way we can know God's ways is to read the Bible ---His word ---otherwise we will only know the worlds way of thinking ----and this is where everything lies ---in our thinking --renewing the mind to God's ways ----laying down the way the world says we should think and give all the weight of our thinking to God's way ----

This is so freeing in our lives because it takes the burden of of us ----God says I will take your burdens and look after us ---We humans don't trust or believe this --

So for me personally I could answer Jesus question --do you love me ---my answer ---Yes ---do I still have to work on this ---absolutely but I have come ten fold in my trust and giving God weight in my life as a whole ----I do nothing now without asking the Holy Spirit -----I understand His way of taking care of me and I have had success so I trust in His ways more than I trust this world's way of doing things ----I still have much to learn and grow into but I am a much Happier ---Healthier ---prosperous person than I was living and thinking like this world ---

Happiness depends on comfort ----you can have a house but no furniture and you will probably not be happy sleeping and eating on the floor of your house ---

Joy comes from what you know in God's word and believe ---so you can have joy in your new house without the furniture because you believe that what God says in His word will come to pass as He says it will which is God will provide all our needs ----God will provide a way for you to get the furniture in your home ---

Peace  

Hi Jim Kenney,

Well, that is how it reads in every English translation.  That is not exactly how it reads in the Greek.

The account in the Greek language provides a very different picture than we come away with in dealing only with English text.

Jesus does not, technically ask the same question three times even though Peter does give the same response three times.

In John 21:  15 and 16 when Jesus asks the question, "Do you love me?" he uses the Greek word Agape.  When Peter responds, "Yes Lord, you know that I love you" he uses the Greek word Phileo.

In John 21:  17 when Jesus asks a question again he chooses not to use Agape and instead uses Phileo.  Which puts Peter's response in line with the question being asked.

This should, I believe, invoke memories of not breaking bruised reeds or snuffing smoldering wicks.

Which kind of turns your direction upside down.  Though Peter's refusal to answer the original question still plays to your position.  Agape clearly calls for more than Peter is prepared to give at that point in time.  Phileo is something that Peter is either more comfortable with or capable of.

The beauty (graciousness) of the passage is that it defeats a faith which requires rigidity.  Jesus shows a soft edge.  Peter, still stinging from his recent string of denials (three times before the cock crowed) is actually well on his way to repeating that performance.

While we read, in English, affirmative answers the first and second time he is questioned the reality is that his answers, by refusing to use the same lanugage Jesus used in asking the questions are denials.

If your parents, spouse or children asked you, "Do you love me?" and you responded, "You know I like you" do you think that they would be delighted with that answer.  They didn't ask you if you liked them, they asked you if you loved them.  Like is good.  Like is not love.

Phileo is good.  Phileo is not agape.  It is a denial.

So, how is Agape served in the passage?

Jesus changes the question.  Jesus, follows Peter's cue and asks a question Peter is willing to affirm.

The spotlight looks to be on Peter.  Jesus is the star performance.

Which plays into Jesus' altering the question.  Why push Peter into another faith strike-out?  Why not build the man's confidence by lobbing  a big fat pitch right into his wheelhouse.

Running with the sports metaphor a little longer.  Jesus and Peter are not playing baseball, heck they aren't even playing softball.  Jesus and Peter are on the same team and the name of the game where you pitch to your own side is three-pitch.  Nobody walks in three-pitch.  In three-pitch the pitcher's strategy is to throw the ball so that their batting team-mate can hit it.

Some in the Church do not know how to play three-pitch.  They are stuck in baseball or softball mode where pitchers are trying to get the best of batters and batters are trying to get the best of pitchers.  Three-pitch is co-operation between pitcher and batter whereas all other derivations of the game are competitions between pitcher and batter.

If Jesus wanted to humiliate Peter another fastball down the middle would have done it.

Instead he serves up a slow hanging curveball, the very pitch Peter has been swinging for.

Grace and peace to you.

John

What we know in God's word is so superficial without a proper advocate ...

And children of God know nothing by biblical definition (Exodus 20:19 for one example) they are androgynous by overiding factors they can do nothing about even if they find it frustrating to learn about the neighbours difficulties! Chi-ite befalls eme and they reject the lessons as painful ... when one can learn from another's sin ... still the oligarchs wouldn't like you to know this. Thus the church fathers said that common people shouldn't know these things and a wealth of talent was burried ... without question as contrary to I Thessaloneons 5:21!

And some heathen will tell me flat out that there are no conflicts in the bible. Now did Jacob struggle with Gabriel? Is this not a mental conflict about thedevil as thought is considered Satan in the bible as it interferes with God-Love?

You can call me the devil's advocate unsafe, I love to probe into a person's desires to see what they haven't thought of ... just love the action as it keeps that called Ron moving ... you do know Ron and Don from ancient wisdom? That is that part missing from a mortal when praying---Louis Buscaglia! Give it a space to work with ... like those people in Amaeus ... or just thoughts entangled in a Mass! This is my interpretation which I do not state as truth as everything indicates truth is thin here in the realm of oligarchs ... a rare bunch that believe they know it all, or God if God is all-that-is an integral sum of love and thought as  projected by Micah ... a dark hard personality with a vision while hidden away in the Shadow like Judah resting under that tree ... being persued by the continuum (that's all) that at that time was called Tamyr ... but now we think it is something needing to be conquered ... as something we don't understand ...

Sound crazy ... that's life as the crap falls as gravid material to work with ... some don't like to face it ... thus balancing the load.

What would creation do without us ? We give a place to putthe failures and some of us are just here to obseve ... why creation gave us light and the humour to see mistaken higher values in the depth of the myth ... myth is simply how things aren't ... unless you understand multiple dimensions ... limited peoples (mortals) are not prepared to go that far ... but ID'll come to them eventually ... the beauty of virtue-os-citii, or "-ite" if you'd like the conjugation ... as Jared ... in a Greek Urn none-the-less ...

All is not as it appears tho' ...

When God said teach my children did heh mean to beat them to death or just put some sense of limits to their freedoms to possess everything. Such desires seem rampart in the higher perspectives ... and who catches what falls? Noz height ... this is really not a nice dimension for 99% of the people passing through and without a Q'lue ... understanding is out of the picture in a pure loving dimension ... as bad as a pure intellectual dimension without love. Does such a comment ring a Bell ... some people hate bells, whistles and all such activity of the lower tiers as they dance down there ... trying to get out ... try your imagination, go'fig Ur ... if it's too hot in the oven ... who supported the torch ...

Gotta love a reflective tale of egos ... eagles? Aboriginal wisdom would pluck a few flight quills for rites ... of myth ... on the soft-headed that can't see connections, or co median values that go both ways ... as double-barrelled humour ...

Then humour was at one time just an attitude, something you could bleed ...

Once again it shows the purpose of the Gospel of the Kingdom. Do we love the ideals of mankind or the ideals of the Kingdom? Though we live amonst mankind's ideals, do we support them? More important still do we lash out against them or do we simply protect ourselves from their effect? Some see the armour of God as being for aggressive purposes (worldly) while others are passive and see all as sinners including selves.

Matthew 13: 22  He also that received seed among the thorns is he that heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful.

Do we love the ideals of the Kingdom more than anything else?

For me, the answer would be an unequivocal "Yes!"

My early thoughts (informed by John's post above which reminded me of what is so often forgotten about those questions) for this week is now up here:

http://ministerialmutterings.blogspot.ca/2013/04/looking-forward-to-apri...

Now to find out what the sermon will end up like......

Do you think you're called to protect yourself from or to stand up to the ideals of man? A monk- living fastidiously sheltered from the evils of the world, or a MLK type dedicatedly speaking up against injustice? Or neither? Most of us are not courageous enough to choose either, for many reasons, and maybe we're not all meant to. Both could be in service to others. It's a matter of degree. Not everyone's purpose is the same, and yet not everyone searches for it. Some just shuffle along. Most of us do, most of the time. If your purpose in the world is to be the next MLK, or to work with sick children, or the kindest most helpful neighbour on the block, so be it- and that can change too. The next MLK might find themselves working for a time in a remote hospital. The kindest neighbour might speak up against injustice in their neighbourhood, and the hospital worker might join the fight for more research into a stigmatized disease-then retire and become a 'monk' and write a book about their experience-life changes as we go along- the problem is apathy.

Before answering the questions, let me explain where I am.
 

I accept that writers wrote with an agenda and an audience in mind.

I also accept that they attributed things and words to Jesus that suited their own theological and political purposes or those of the early church they represented.

The Gospel of John, thought to be the lastest of the gospels, usually goes its distinct way.

John skips birth narratives and such but starts at the beginning of time. The divine Word was present in creation and incarnate in Jesus. In John, Jesus is elevated (being it is later) and defined in Greek philosophical terms.

(Of note: John is also not the most kingdom speaking.)

He does say that "I doubt that the entire world would hold the books that would have to be written"  to tell of all Jesus did.

Yet, he never mentions Jesus talking in parables or aphorisms. John has long discourses and of course, for John,  it is obvious who Jesus was.... DUH!

IMO His gospel almost becomes a parable about Jesus.

So, John's thought is that the early followers missed something glaringly obvious to him.

Peter is among the first called, some gospels say he also walked on the water, he is the rock and he also starts to be affiliated with being of little faith and denied Jesus. He cut an ear at the arrest of Jesus, according to John, and yet is back fishing. John also has Peter being the first to enter the tomb.

What on earth are they doing? Fishing. Yet, that is who they were, fishermen.

They are also fishing on the wrong side. Switch to the other side and the nets will be full. What do you think that means?

Is the three time affirmation to balance that three fold denial?

About halfway through Acts, the focus turns away from Peter toward Paul, hmmm.

I think that when you love a shepherd one leans toward tending and feeding their flock. My friend's late husband wasa shepherd in Spain. His son took over. Those who have loved a farmer have also felt compelled to tend their crops.

I am not sure I would ask if Peter loved Jesus more than fishing.  One can watch Nascar on the weekend and not love Nascar more than Jesus.

I also am going to guess whether Peter loved Jesus the most. I am also not fond of trying to figure out which parent a child loves most or which child loves their parents the most.

I believe love requires action, big actions and little actions. Big once in a blue moon actions usually do not feel as loving as those little contant things. But, sometimes big things can overshadow little things.

I love Jesus more than my traditions and buildings. I guess making the transition I would have to.

I loved Jesus enough to put much on the line and much is still on the line. My stable life went upside down (Jesus turns stuff upside down) my finances, my plans....

Would I be loved if I was still fishing, I mean doing what I was before? Woudl I be AS loved?

IMO Yes!

Sometimes it's a persons status in the community that enables them to be of greatest service- and gives them that responsibility. ( to those whom much is given much more is required?) sometimes the buildings serve a purpose which is greater than could be achieved with out them (shelter from cold, a place to serve food, a place to gather). Sometimes traditions serve a purpose- perhaps a familiarity or sense of belonging- that change because they no longer offer that same sense of belonging or familiarity to outsiders and may reinforce for those outsiders why it is they feel they don't belong. Keeping a tradition doesn't mean one loves Jesus more, or less. Keeping a building doesn't mean one loves Jesus more or less. Having status in the community doesn't mean one loves Jesus more or less. It's more about aknowledging what you have and then what you're going to do with that. Not always comfortable choices.

This is commentary on this passage

John 21:15-17

Jesus pointedly asks Peter three times whether he loved Him. The first time He asks whether he loved Him "more than these," referring either to his fellow apostles or the tools of his fishing trade. The inference is inescapable: Jesus wanted Peter to hold Him of greater importance than anything on earth. Considering Peter's weightyresponsibility, he could not be faithful to Jesus without the staunchest commitment to Him as most important of all in his life.

The meaning to us is clear. We must love Christ supremely, or we do not love Him much if at all. If we are not willing to give up all earthly possessions, forsake all earthly friends, and obey Him above all others—including our own carnal desires—to be faithful to Him, our attachment to Him is tenuous at best. Is such a proposition too much? Does not marriage require a similar faithfulness from each spouse? Without it, it is no wonder there is so much adultery and divorce.

John 21:

Verses 15-19 Our Lord addressed Peter by his original name, as if he had forfeited that of Peter through his denying him. He now answered, Thou knowest that I love thee; but without professing to love Jesus more than others. We must not be surprised to have our sincerity called into question, when we ourselves have done that which makes it doubtful. Every remembrance of past sins, even pardoned sins, renews the sorrow of a true penitent. Conscious of integrity, Peter solemnly appealed to Christ, as knowing all things, even the secrets of his heart. It is well when our falls and mistakes make us more humble and watchful. The sincerity of our love to God must be brought to the test; and it behoves us to inquire with earnest, preserving prayer to the heart-searching God, to examine and prove us, whether we are able to stand this test. No one can be qualified to feed the sheep and lambs of Christ, who does not love the good Shepherd more than any earthly advantage or object. It is the great concern of every good man, whatever death he dies, to glorify God in it; for what is our chief end but this, to die to the Lord, at the word of the Lord?

This passage is all about putting God first in our lives ---not things or careers---or other people ---Seek God and all things will be added unto you ----Jesus laid down His life for us ---the ultimate Love is to lay down our thirst for things in this world and rely on God --Putting Him First in all we do ----  

Peace  

Without the aid of weed or booze                                                                                                                                         WB has some stuff I choose                                                                                                          Stuff that sometimes make sense                                                                                                                Most for me is far too dense                                                                                                   Some are just here to observe                                                                                                Thats a line that hit a nerve                                                                                                      I dont add and try not to detract                                                                                                Going nowhere and thats a fact                                                                                               Myth is merely what things arnt                                                                                                A bad line from someone so smart                                                                                           Myth has truth encoded in story                                                                                               Seldom being exqlanatory.                                                                                                       I end in agreement soooCheers...                                                                                            All is not as it aqqears

For those intrested you can read the English and Greek of this scripture here

http://interlinearbible.org/john/21-15.htm

"choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful."

Is this like  tawdry compaction or the waisting of that piece just above the butte end of the joke ... the fore necking of the hed thing as hedonistic without hart ... deire meis ...

Never, never ignore the wee things like the damn spot that floats in the undecimated field of mind/soulpsyche whatever that is out there as a devilish enigma! It could be a string in the mental disambiguation ... as you yourself unravel ...

King James attached that description to Hebrew (devilish enigma) I think that was a no, no in the dispelling of his education into archaic wisdom, knowledge ... something a king didn't think he needed to know as REX oligarch ... hed just do as he thought ... brae'n phart? The void ascendeth ...

Something to put an ironic point in yer followings ...

Weed or Bo'Oz ... that's Kohl Mon as I get high just on ewe ... an odd conception in space ... mortal thought! Isn't that just beyond IÐ aL ... subversive in the icon ...

There is a great quote from The Hobbitt: An Unexpected Journey.

Gandalf the Grey is talking to shire dwelling Bilbo Baggins in the snug comfort of his Bag End Hobbit house.Gandalf has just told Bilbo a tall tale of Bilbo's Tookish grandfather,armed with only a club, who beheads an enemy with the blow and invents golf at the same time.
 

Bilbo says Gandalf is exaggerating.

Gandalf says, “All good stories deserve embellishment,”

I also scribbled another Gandalf quote down. I will drop it here.

"Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I found it is the small everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay. Small acts of kindness and love. Why Bilbo Baggins? I don't know. Perhaps because I am afraid, and he gives me courage."

PS alm 72:5,6 is appropriate ... weis on the carpet, being tested according to something out off the chaos of the babble ... the court resides as big rheum in adica ...

Enough to rattle bones?

Hi John, The commentary I used caused me to rethink the different forms of 'love' used in this passage.  Your emphasis on the different forms was where I started, but I let go of that when there is lack of agreement on the significance of the two words.  I really appreciate your analysis which has Jesus adjusting to meet Peter where he is at.  I will try to remember that in my efforts to work for change where I am serving.  Change is essential, or the congregation ends, but I need to keep looking for changes that begin where they are.  Thank you.

Personally I think I might find it easier to say I loved Jesus, without a threat held over my head, such as Peter experienced before the crucifixion when he denied Christ 3 times. I would also find it easier to say I loved Jesus while standing amongst other believers rather than unbelievers..

I'm curious how people reacted to being called "sheep" back then, especally while being oppressed.

Could there possibly be a false congregation of people that really don't believe in a hidden cognizance ... like Æsus within?

Maybe it's just peculiar satyr ... like a Shadow ... without doubt ... a hidden entity that knows. Internal to the mortal that's just as is ... for the normal period of time ... what then?

Perhaps a bit of comtemptlation is due ... sort of like a flighty thought in a hostile environment that surrounds us ... a real whitewashing in another dimension ... catharsis. Then there's the unbelievable wahl ... the horizon to deal with ... and all those outliers!

waterfall,

I agree with your comments

"Personally I think I might find it easier to say I loved Jesus, without a threat held over my head, such as Peter experienced before the crucifixion when he denied Christ 3 times. I would also find it easier to say I loved Jesus while standing amongst other believers rather than unbelievers."

I have asked folks if they think Jesus is insecure, hard of hearing, thinks Peter is lying....3 times he asks! So, why?

Some folks break down the Greek words for love knowing English does not have so many words. (Agape is devotional, loyal, self sacrificing and totallycommited. To the Greeks, agape was the highest expression of love. It is unrelenting, even at the expense of one's own life. So, it cannot and will not fail. Some folks place emphasis on the number 3 being good. Some place emphasis on Peter's sins and accountability, asking three times is about those three denials, Some place the emphasis on Jesus being forgiving and it makes each time forgiven..Some think about a weight being lifted from Peter, etc....

I liked this thought.

Hi unsafe-- I injoyed  post very much .As i will adress in a min. I wanted to say something on Rev Johns post. He said the Greek word Jesus used at first to Peter was Agape. I think I understand why.Jesus used it,  For Jesus had said. -----

-We who has spent time in the Forces, no this . We are trained to die for our friends, To lay ones life down, for another. It is also the way a woman and man, should feel for each other.When they take those vows, of LOVE.My Life is my wife"s, I would give it up in a secound, if it would help her.That feeling is also the way I feel for Jesus. Peter would be called to show this later, and this time he would get it right.-----Now bach to your post Sister-----As i said I enjoyed it all, but this part cot my eye.---

The meaning to us is clear. We must love Christ supremely, or we do not love Him much if at all. If we are not willing to give up all earthly possessions, forsake all earthly friends, and obey Him above all others—including our own carnal desires—to be faithful to Him, our attachment to Him is tenuous at best. Is such a proposition too much? Does not marriage require a similar faithfulness from each spouse? Without it, it is no wonder there is so much adultery and divorce.

Thank you Unsafe , I believe some here , and even with in my own family, would be helped . If they read this about 8-9 times over real slow.It is how we should treat our GOD . It is also how we should treat our mate. God Bless.--airclean33

So, thinking on this more....Jesus is asking people to go where they cannot see. He is telling them to not be afraid of the dark. That they need to quit trying to stay where they think it is light, and where they think it is safe. He is asking them to take risks, to look deep. He is asking them into tight places. He is aware they are on their back and may be/feel stuck, compelled, forced...to stay there.  He is also aware he is flipping the whole world, as they know it, upside down. He is asking them to do more than wait to die....

I can see using sheep as the metaphor.

If a mortal god (isolated ideal) could pull the wool over the eye's of something convinced not to think first ... would that be a wholly sol' ... or a hairy cent's worth ... Mir mite? Sort of fuzzy sensation in th'Isaac ... or just a sock puppet?

Then there are the rare alternate ways of cunning ... so spirits could avoid being seen by angry physical gods ... black water pools? Grand or groos spot to bury thoughts ... sometimes a curse or a blessing depending on which side of the BH you take perspectives ...

Once in a conversation with Penecostal Ministers they told me they don't believe in spirits only in the holy ghost that of Don ... a vacant space shot full of holes ... mere essences of what they desired to do to me. I think they avoided me for fear the thinking devil would get to them ... but I really cared so I didn't poke eme a lot ... just plaeyed with their words a bit ... mind play?

Are there essences in myth? Now there's something to discuss on the matter of maleable minds ... sort of ironic in males as camp followers can detract them from fighting ... all be faere in love and war ... the Ephraime form wins in the end like V' Nous in a garden ... naked as sole ... close to phesh-heh ... and old icon that dwells in the mind like alpha in the pool  ... the first thing that happens when observed my male ... thoughts go missing!

You've heard of the myth of the lassie in the loch? A real threat to a warring Lar ... or Lord as we call em today ...

One must know their "outlier" tongues ... alien intelligences ... like a donkey they go dumbly where led ... why some famous writer expressed in hidden words the power of Donkie Oude ... as good as the loss of Louis Miller in Mackie's song ... dark humour or what?

Doesn't Jesus mention something about if you love me feed my sheep? Could this also mean love my sheep but can we love sheep too much? Apparently so according to a Scottish friend of mine.

He told me this joke ( how does a Scot sing the song by the Rolling Stones " Hey you get off of my cloud"? ( Hey Mc Cloud get off me ewe).

Okay I guess it wasn't very funny. Maybe it was the way he said it.

Dialex is everything ... sort of an attitude ... spirit of the thing! If ewe'r aware if the fuzz involved ...

Here is what came out of my mought this morning.....

http://stpaulsuc.podbean.com/2013/04/14/catch-fish-feed-sheep/