How to Effectively Study and Interpret of the Bible

[Jay Ross]

Unless the "student" can read K. Greek, or Hebrew, then they are not "reading the texts" .

They are only reading/studying the WORK of whomever TRANSLATED the Lexicons, etc.
So, they are reading the TRANSLATION, . . they are not """reading or studying the Greek or Hebrew"", unless they can read and speak both FLUENTLY..

So, when you or anyone tells a bible student to "read the K. Greek, and Hebrew".... and they can't read it, and all they are reading is the ENGLISH Translation.........they are studying someone's "Translation", vs actually studying the "originals" that actually don't even EXIST .

Reader, ....avoid people "teachers" "scholars".... who tell you to "study the Greek and Hebrew' when in fact you would NOT be unable to read it, and you are only reading a Translation.

So, some people who try to lead the student, really just need to just go have some Ice Cream, and watch Television, as they do not know what they are talking about, and just want to be perceived as "Scholar". "Leadership" "Authority figure".

There are way too many of these "types" running around, wasting the time of sincere believers who sincerely want to learn the scriptures in a Bible that are the word of God.

It is good to check out the Hebrew and Greek texts to verify whether or not there is contextual accuracy between the oldest available texts and those translations which convey the same contextual message. The issue is that we have many and varied "dictionaries" in the created available Metadata for the respective Hebrew and Greek texts so that even if we can fluently read the Hebrew or Greek texts if we rely on the wrong metadata our understanding will be no better than the translations that we have available to us.

What has affected the available Metadata for translating the Hebrew and Greek texts is the Jewish biased understanding like the Promised Land was a forever covenantal promise on God's part. However, the possession of the Promised Land only began when Israel began the journey to enter the Promised Land and ended with King David who gained dominion of tracks of land north of the Land of Canaan which was listed in the Genesis 15:17ff of the respective lands that they would have possession of. This possession of all of the Promised Land began to be lost shortly after Solomon's death when the nation of Israel was split around three years after the start of Rehoboam reign. The Promised Land began to be lost because of the weakness of the split kingdom and the extremes of the Promised Land was taken away.

King David was promised that his line of descendant kings would retain possession of/dominion over the Land of Canaan and even that was taken from the Israelites in 70 AD.

Another problem is that the translators of the Book of Genesis 13 state that God gave Abraham the land that he had walked on and seen, but in Acts 7, Stephen correctly stated that Abraham had no piece of the land where he could rest his feet upon.

Here is the NKLV translation which is followed by my paraphrasing of these same verses: -

This is the NKJV translation of Genesis 13:14-17: -

14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: “Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever. 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you.”​

This is how I understand that these verses should be paraphrased/translated: -

14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are — northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the earth which you see, {that (entity)}, I will give to your descendants for a long period of time whose ending, which is beyond man’s comprehension, is at the vanishing point, {of this particular time period}, in the future.[1] 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in my earth through its length and its width, for this {entity} I will give. "​

Notice that the NKJV is in conflict with what Stephen state during his defence, whereas my suggested paraphrased of these same verses is in agreement with what Stephen had stated.

We really do need a good metadata source to accompany us when we sit down to read the original language texts.

We also need to question the authenticity of the translations that we reference as to whether or not it conveys the same context to what was originally written in the original text of the scriptures.

The Holy Spirit will prompt us to verify the translation as to whether or not it is actually correct in what it is conveying.

Shalom

---

[1] A simpler way of saying this verse could be: - “for all the earth which you see, that entity, I will give to your descendants for a long period of time where the end point of that time period, will be beyond your descendant's capacity to comprehend when the possession of the described land will end.

 

[Johann]

14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are — northward, southward, eastward, and westward; 15 for all the earth which you see, {that (entity)}, I will give to your descendants for a long period of time whose ending, which is beyond man’s comprehension, is at the vanishing point, {of this particular time period}, in the future.[1] 16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered. 17 Arise, walk in my earth through its length and its width, for this {entity} I will give. "​

Which bible are you using here @Jay Ross? since this is a paraphrase rather than a direct translation?

New King James Version (NKJV):
14 And the Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him: "Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;
15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.
16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered.
17 Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you."

New International Version (NIV):
14 The Lord said to Abram after Lot had parted from him, “Look around from where you are, to the north and south, to the east and west.
15 All the land that you see I will give to you and your offspring forever.
16 I will make your offspring like the dust of the earth, so that if anyone could count the dust, then your offspring could be counted.
17 Go, walk through the length and breadth of the land, for I am giving it to you.”

English Standard Version (ESV):
14 The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, “Lift up your eyes and look from the place where you are, northward and southward and eastward and westward,
15 for all the land that you see I will give to you and to your offspring forever.
16 I will make your offspring as the dust of the earth, so that if one can count the dust of the earth, your offspring also can be counted.
17 Arise, walk through the length and the breadth of the land, for I will give it to you.”

In each of these versions, the wording is relatively consistent and adheres closely to the original Hebrew text, emphasizing the promise of land and numerous descendants given to Abram by God. Here is a more precise and standard rendering:

14 "The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, 'Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;
15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.
16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered.
17 Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you.'"

This precise wording provides a clear and faithful representation of the biblical promise without the additional interpretative elements found in the paraphrased version you initially provided.

 

[Behold]

It is good to check out the Hebrew and Greek text

Not if you can't read it.
How many "christians" worldwide can read Koine Greek or Hebrew?

What .0000000000000000000002% ?????????

So, the CON, is.....when a person wants to present themselves as an authority, then they say...."the greek, the Hebrew, the Originals say".

And the poor little christian is supposed to say..>>>"oh my, they can read that stuff, so they must be an AUTHORITY">.. "So, i'll just put my bible aways and let these authorities tell me all about the errors in the word of God"

OR..

The person has a greek lexicon, and they can't read it.........but there is an English Translation there in the margin, that they can read, so they read that, and come to a Forum, and start "teaching the Original Greek" to correct the bible, as that is all that ever happens in these situations..
So, that FAKIR, is now pretending to be a "teacher of the Greek, "originals"..

And what is all this?

Its FAKE, and Christians generally dont realize it, and that is why they are captured and mislead by these "types".

 

[Jay Ross]

In each of these versions, the wording is relatively consistent and adheres closely to the original Hebrew text, emphasizing the promise of land and numerous descendants given to Abram by God. Here is a more precise and standard rendering:

14 "The Lord said to Abram, after Lot had separated from him, 'Lift your eyes now and look from the place where you are—northward, southward, eastward, and westward;
15 for all the land which you see I give to you and your descendants forever.
16 And I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth; so that if a man could number the dust of the earth, then your descendants also could be numbered.
17 Arise, walk in the land through its length and its width, for I give it to you.'"

This precise wording provides a clear and faithful representation of the biblical promise without the additional interpretative elements found in the paraphrased version you initially provided.

I beg to differ that the translations you have referenced are a good contextual translation of the Hebrew particularly when we consider what Stephen said in this verse which the members of the Sanhedrin did not disagree with: - Acts 7:5: - "5 He gave him no inheritance here, not even a foot of ground."

Stephen did go on to say that the Lord will give Abraham and his descendant possession in the distant future of the earth that God had promised to give to Abraham and his descendants.

Shalom

 

[Jay Ross]

@Behold

I posted this "It is good to check out the Hebrew and Greek text." which you used as part of your rebuttal which you had ripped from its context of what was being said. Here is the first paragraph of my post.

It is good to check out the Hebrew and Greek texts to verify whether or not there is contextual accuracy between the oldest available texts and those translations which convey the same contextual message. The issue is that we have many and varied "dictionaries" in the created available Metadata for the respective Hebrew and Greek texts so that even if we can fluently read the Hebrew or Greek texts if we rely on the wrong metadata our understanding will be no better than the translations that we have available to us.

Not if you can't read it.
How many "christians" worldwide can read Koine Greek or Hebrew?

What .0000000000000000000002% ?????????

So, the CON, is.....when a person wants to present themselves as an authority, then they say...."the greek, the Hebrew, the Originals say".

And the poor little christian is supposed to say..>>>"oh my, they can read that stuff, so they must be an AUTHORITY">.. "So, i'll just put my bible aways and let these authorities tell me all about the errors in the word of God"

and

The person has a greek lexicon, and they can't read it.........but there is an English Translation there in the margin, that they can read, so they read that, and come to a Forum, and start "teaching the Original Greek" to correct the bible, as that is all that ever happens in these situations..
So, that FAKIR, is now pretending to be a "teacher of the Greek, "originals"..

Your post is a put down of anyone who has put effort into trying to come with the accuracy of their respective translation that they use.

If you believe that the paraphrase that I had provided as an example is not contextually consistent with the oldest origin Hebrew text, then please enlighten us all with your wisdom and provide a consistent contextual paraphrase to back up your claims.

Otherwise, you are peeing into the breeze so to speak and not providing any substance to support you objections.

Goodbye

 

[Behold]

Your post is a put down of anyone who has put effort into trying to come with the accuracy of their respective translation that they use.

My "post" is an accurate assessment regarding the fact that most GENTILE Christians.......do not read greek or hebrew.
And Most "Christians" are GENTILES, not Messianic Jews who might read Hebrew, but don't read Koine Greek.

So, as i stated truthfully.......... its a FARCE, its Pride Filled Fakery, for "scholarship" to try to present "original Koine Greek" and "original Hebrew"... as "the real word of God", by claiming that the actual Englsh Bible, is "errors"..

What that situation is actually doing.. is causing real Christians, to doubt and lose their faith in the Bible,.. which is the Devil's work.... and that ministry tries to cause Christians to turn to people who FALSELY claim that Greek and Hebrew, ""is superior"", and that because they can read it, .... proves they are the Authority over the word of God. (The Holy Bible).

And then you have people, who dont read any Greek or Hebrew, who come to forums or stand in pulpits, stating that the " original Greek says, and the Hebrew teaches" and they can't even read it, and in fact, they read the Translation only, and now pretend they are "teaching the Originals".

So, this is a "shell game".. and its incredibly FALSE and Dishonest..., most of the time.

 

[Johann]

I beg to differ that the translations you have referenced are a good contextual translation of the Hebrew particularly when we consider what Stephen said in this verse which the members of the Sanhedrin did not disagree with: - Acts 7:5: - "5 He gave him no inheritance here, not even a foot of ground."

Stephen did go on to say that the Lord will give Abraham and his descendant possession in the distant future of the earth that God had promised to give to Abraham and his descendants.

Shalom

What Hebrew Bible are you using @Jay Ross?

 

[AW Bowman]

First, a clarification: I understand the comments and concerns voiced by my thread/post distractors. I also appreciate their views concerning those who question and/or bring doubt upon the word of
God. Those objections are indeed valid. However, I do not think that such criticisms apply to my offerings. I do not tell folks what to believe or how to believe, rather I encourage people to find a method to enhance their own understanding of Scriptures and apply their understanding to themselves. This also assists them to enhance their own approach to the reading and study of God’s word.

This approach to Bible study is taken from the Antioch of Syria approach, developed in the first century. It is also the method used by several current Bible teachers and apologists (I have, at least did have, a list of these individuals. I’ll post the list when I locate it). So, this not a new or revolutionary approach.
---------------------------
A note of correction. In an earlier post I said, “There are 1040 O.T. quotes in the N.T….” That should have read, “There are 1,333 O.T. quotes and references in the N.T. …” /sorry/

 

[AW Bowman]

I would like to present at least one example of using some of the “Things we need to know about the author and the book” that I posted early in the thread.

- What did the author say about the same subject in the same book, and elsewhere (if he did)?
- What did other authors say about the same subject, if they did?

Let’s take an Old Testament instruction concerning the tribal inheritance of land in Israel.

Numbers 18:20-24; 26:62 and Deuteronomy 18:1-2 Review these scriptures in your favorite translation. And it becomes clear that the tribe of Levi is excluded from inheriting the land of Isarel as the other eleven tribes. This a true biblical conclusion. A non-biblical conclusion that is often preached is that the Levites had no land themselves and must rely on the Temple tithes from those other eleven tribes to survive. I have heard this theme many times over the years and frequently applied to contemporary churches.

The problem is that the Levites had a goodly portion of land assigned to them for their livestock and their agriculture (See Num 35:1-3) and they also had a good income stream! What about their finances? Not every Levi served in the Temple as a priest and consumed their allotment from the tithes.

The priestly tribe of Levi was also the “professional tribe” among the Hebrew nation. They were teachers (Neh 8:7), public scribes (II Chr 34:13), professional musicians (I Chr 25:1-31), and architects and held other professional positions. They were not a “poor” tribe.

By reading the referenced verses in their context we can an idea of the culture, religious practices and what different authors had to say about the same subject(s). Using that information, you glean from this “little” study, you can apply it to your other studies. This will allow you to build an overview of the culture, social structure, religious practices, etc. at the time of a specific writing. Also, to note the changes in these areas over time. The same goes for the New Testament studies. Note taking is almost a given in a Bible study.

Application: Make notes and categorize them according to areas of interest(s). Compare contexts. Where there are conflicts in the scriptures, or apparent contradictions (especially between authors) we have what is usually referred to as a paradox. Resolving a paradox requires further study to resolve these areas. I’ll give a N.T. example of this by Friday.

Bible study is not a trivial undertaking. It is hard work.

 

[AW Bowman]

Have a happy – and safe – 4th of July.

 

[AW Bowman]

A Flash Practical Exercise

Acts 15: KJV

24 Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:
25 It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men unto you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul,
26 Men that have hazarded their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.
27 We have sent therefore Judas and Silas, who shall also tell you the same things by mouth.2
28 For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things;
29 That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
30 So when they were dismissed, they came to Antioch: and when they had gathered the multitude together, they delivered the epistle:

Emphases: Verses 28, 29
Question: How will you study & interpret this passage?

Post your effort only if you wish - this is not a "formal" course. I will post my approach on Friday.

See ya then.

 

[AW Bowman]

Attached is my "simple" passage study. As we progress the study will grow more complete. The apparent contradiction (paradox) will also be addressed in the interpretation material.

A couple of items before we headlong into Bible interpretation. Everyone has their own interpretation of God's word. That is a given. We all rely on our own ideas of what the Bible says or should say. Our authority is our own good ideas, the commentaries of our favorite pastor, Bible teacher, books, what we hear from our parents, friends, and neighbors, etc. We can't get away from it! Also, there is only one correct interpretation of God's word, and that rests with the original author. However, God did not dictate the Bible. The authors were the ones that wrote down what the Spirit inspired and gifted then to write. Even so, we do have areas where there are indeed dictated passages, i.e. where we run across phrases such as, "thus says the Lord", "I am the Lord God", etc. We can take these passages as a direct quote from God, Himself. Everything else is what the Spirit inspired the authors to write down.

What about the authors? What they wrote they first filtered through their own spiritual maturity, then their language, customs, i.e. their world view, etc. And, we have all kinds of biblical styles. We find poetry, historic, prophetic, instructional, books, etc. and even sometimes find mixtures of these different genre in a single book. So, if we are looking for a uniform and perfect method to correctly interpret the Bible, I am sorry, such a method does not exist. However, we can at least approach a common bases in our efforts for interpreting scripture.

 

[AW Bowman]

Before jumping off into the meat of interpreting scripture, I would like to set the record straight. I am not the originator of all this material, and to also acknowledge the two professors who are most directly responsible for the Bible study tools I have acquired.

Dr. Robert Allon, Allon Ministries: Hebrew and Greek language mentor.

Dr. Bob Utley, Retired Hermeneutics Professor: Bible Interpretation Instructor

I have requested and received permission from both to freely incorporate their materials into my teaching. Unfortunately, online forums are not the best vehicle for such an undertaking. So, this is at best, a new experience for all of us. If it works, great. If not, then we can drop the effort and move on to more productive endeavors.

Thanks for sticking with it for as long as you have.

 

[GracePeace]

Application: Make notes and categorize them according to areas of interest(s). Compare contexts. Where there are conflicts in the scriptures, or apparent contradictions (especially between authors) we have what is usually referred to as a paradox. Resolving a paradox requires further study to resolve these areas. I’ll give a N.T. example of this by Friday.

Bible study is not a trivial undertaking. It is hard work.

I like the fact that you say this. I wish more would heed this basic advice.

 

[GracePeace]

Application: Make notes and categorize them according to areas of interest(s). Compare contexts. Where there are conflicts in the scriptures, or apparent contradictions (especially between authors) we have what is usually referred to as a paradox. Resolving a paradox requires further study to resolve these areas. I’ll give a N.T. example of this by Friday.

Bible study is not a trivial undertaking. It is hard work.

The biggest "contradiction", or "paradox", I've found is the issue of works and faith--it took a long time, and I learned to pray during the process (this is when I'm given the answers--reading only gives me questions), but I think it makes some sense to me now.

 

[Johann]

Before jumping off into the meat of interpreting scripture, I would like to set the record straight. I am not the originator of all this material, and to also acknowledge the two professors who are most directly responsible for the Bible study tools I have acquired.

Dr. Robert Allon, Allon Ministries: Hebrew and Greek language mentor.

Dr. Bob Utley, Retired Hermeneutics Professor: Bible Interpretation Instructor

I have requested and received permission from both to freely incorporate their materials into my teaching. Unfortunately, online forums are not the best vehicle for such an undertaking. So, this is at best, a new experience for all of us. If it works, great. If not, then we can drop the effort and move on to more productive endeavors.

Thanks for sticking with it for as long as you have.

I know Bob Utley, can you give me a link on Dr. Robert Allon?

 

[Johann]

Before jumping off into the meat of interpreting scripture, I would like to set the record straight. I am not the originator of all this material, and to also acknowledge the two professors who are most directly responsible for the Bible study tools I have acquired.

Dr. Robert Allon, Allon Ministries: Hebrew and Greek language mentor.

Dr. Bob Utley, Retired Hermeneutics Professor: Bible Interpretation Instructor

I have requested and received permission from both to freely incorporate their materials into my teaching. Unfortunately, online forums are not the best vehicle for such an undertaking. So, this is at best, a new experience for all of us. If it works, great. If not, then we can drop the effort and move on to more productive endeavors.

Thanks for sticking with it for as long as you have.

Don't stop!

 

[AW Bowman]

I know Bob Utley, can you give me a link on Dr. Robert Allon?

Yes: Home - Allon.org
Right now his site is under maintenance.
My permission letter is enclosed in one of the threads on my site.

For those interested: Dr. Utley's url is Free Bible Commentaries and Bible Study Tools
My permission letter is dated October 9,2012

My url is: https://hatalmidim.boards.net/
It is also "Under Maintenance". I can open it up for a short time, if interested.

Major note: I am NOT looking to harvest members from here to my web page.

 

[AW Bowman]

I would like to add an example where the use of a Lexicon is a great value in understanding scripture. John 21:
15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [agapao] thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [agapao] thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [[phileo] thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest [phileo] thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Full notes:

G25 ἀγαπάω agapao (a-ğa-paō') v.
1. to love (in a social or moral sense).
2. (perfect passive participle) having been loved.
3. (diminished as adjective) beloved (this simple adjective greatly diminishes the incredible fullness of having been loved by God with his purpose and forethought and the longevity for which he has waited for us to love him back).
{chiefly of the heart (wholehearted, unconditional, devoted) while G5368 is chiefly of the head (feelings, conditional, sentimental)}
[perhaps from ἄγαν agan “much” or remotely from Hebrew agab, but in the sense of H160] ++KJV: (be-)love(-ed)
Compare: G5368 See also: G26, G27, H160, H5689

G5368 φιλέω phileo (fiy-le'-ō) v.
1. to be fond of (an individual or an object).
2. to have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling).
3. to be a friend to.
4. (by extension) to affectionately favor.
5. (specially) to kiss (as a mark of affection).
{while G25 (chiefly of the heart) is wider than G5368 (chiefly of the head), embracing especially the judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of principle, duty and propriety: the two thus stand related very much as G2309 and G1014, or as G2372 and G3563 respectively} [from G5384 KJV: kiss, love Root(s): G5384

Now we can see why Jesus was so pushy in asking Peter if he loved Him. Jesus was asking do you have a wholehearted, unconditional, and devoted love for me. While Peter kept replying, Yes Lord, I have [great] affection for you. Peter was stuck at the affection level, while Jesus was looking for a deeper commitment. When He didn’t get it, He lowered His expectation to Peter’s level. This was a major positional change, not obvious from a simple reading.

 

[RedFan]

I would like to add an example where the use of a Lexicon is a great value in understanding scripture. John 21:
15 So when they had dined, Jesus saith to Simon Peter, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [agapao] thou me more than these? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. He saith unto him, Feed my lambs.
16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [agapao] thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep.
17 He saith unto him the third time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest [[phileo] thou me? Peter was grieved because he said unto him the third time, Lovest [phileo] thou me? And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love [phileo] thee. Jesus saith unto him, Feed my sheep.

Full notes:

G25 ἀγαπάω agapao (a-ğa-paō') v.
1. to love (in a social or moral sense).
2. (perfect passive participle) having been loved.
3. (diminished as adjective) beloved (this simple adjective greatly diminishes the incredible fullness of having been loved by God with his purpose and forethought and the longevity for which he has waited for us to love him back).
{chiefly of the heart (wholehearted, unconditional, devoted) while G5368 is chiefly of the head (feelings, conditional, sentimental)}
[perhaps from ἄγαν agan “much” or remotely from Hebrew agab, but in the sense of H160] ++KJV: (be-)love(-ed)
Compare: G5368 See also: G26, G27, H160, H5689

G5368 φιλέω phileo (fiy-le'-ō) v.
1. to be fond of (an individual or an object).
2. to have affection for (denoting personal attachment, as a matter of sentiment or feeling).
3. to be a friend to.
4. (by extension) to affectionately favor.
5. (specially) to kiss (as a mark of affection).
{while G25 (chiefly of the heart) is wider than G5368 (chiefly of the head), embracing especially the judgment and the deliberate assent of the will as a matter of principle, duty and propriety: the two thus stand related very much as G2309 and G1014, or as G2372 and G3563 respectively} [from G5384 KJV: kiss, love Root(s): G5384

Now we can see why Jesus was so pushy in asking Peter if he loved Him. Jesus was asking do you have a wholehearted, unconditional, and devoted love for me. While Peter kept replying, Yes Lord, I have [great] affection for you. Peter was stuck at the affection level, while Jesus was looking for a deeper commitment. When He didn’t get it, He lowered His expectation to Peter’s level. This was a major positional change, not obvious from a simple reading.

An opposing viewpoint: Let’s Stop Over-Interpreting Agape vs Phileo