Love

LOVE

GOD IS LOVE; AND HE THAT DWELLETH IN LOVE DWELLETH IN GOD, AND GOD IN HIM, 1Jo 4:16 . Love is a chief attribute of Jehovah, the length and breadth and height and depth of which are beyond comprehension, for they are infinite, Zep 3:18,19 . Between the three Persons of the Godhead, love is unutterable full, perfect, and blissful; towards holy angels and Christians, God’s love is an infinite fatherly complacency and affection; towards sinners, it is immeasurable compassion. It is shown in all his works and ways, and dictated his holy law, but is most signally displayed in the gospel, Joh 3:16 . “Herein is love.”Holy love in man would make the whole heart and soul supremely delight in and obey God, and cordially and practically love all beings according to their character-the good with fellowship of soul, and the evil with a Christ-like benevolence. Such a love would meet and fulfil all the ends of the law, Mat 22:37-40 1Ch 13:8-10 . Without it, none can enter heaven; and as the affections of every unrenewed heart are all mixed with sin, being given to forbidden objects, or selfishly and unduly given to objects not forbidden, we must be “born again” in order to see God, Joh 3:3 1Jo 4:7,19 5:4.

Fuente: American Tract Society Bible Dictionary

Love

1. Linguistic usage.-Two verbs are used by the NT to designate religious love- and . In the Septuagint a third term, , occurs, but only once sensu bono, viz. Pro 4:6 (love of wisdom), once in a neutral sense, viz. Est 2:17 (the king loved Esther), everywhere else as a figure of idolatry or political theocratic unfaithfulness (Jer 22:20; Jer 22:22, Lam 1:19, Eze 16:33; Eze 16:36-37; Eze 23:5; Eze 23:9; Eze 23:22, Hos 2:7; Hos 2:10; Hos 2:12-13). That the NT does not employ at all is probably due to the sensual associations of the word. In regard to the difference between and the following should be noticed. The etymology of is uncertain, but it seems to be allied to roots expressing admiration, taking pride in, taking pleasure in. This points to the conclusion that is the love of selection and complacency based on the perception of something in the object loved that attracts and pleases. This element of selective attachment shows itself in the fact that can mean to be contented with, to acquiesce in, to put up with, and also in this, that is not used of the love of mere compassion. On the other hand, seems to have as its fundamental root-meaning the intimacy of bodily touch, fondling, caressing, whence it can signify to kiss; it therefore denotes the love of close association in the habitual relations of life-love, between kindred, between husband and wife, between friends (Mat 6:5; Mat 10:37; Mat 23:6, Luk 20:46, Joh 11:3; Joh 11:36; Joh 12:25; Joh 15:19, 1Ti 6:10 [], 2Ti 3:4 [], Tit 2:4 [], Jam 4:4 [ ]). In Latin diligere corresponds to , amare to , except that amare covers a wider range, corresponding also to the Greek . From this distinctive and fundamental meaning the fact may be explained that in biblical Greek is used exclusively where mans love for God comes under consideration: it here implies the recognition of the adorable and lovable character of the Deity. is never used of mans love for God as such, because the mental attitude of intimacy which the word implies would be out of place in the creature with reference to the Deity (it is different where the love of the disciples for Jesus is spoken of [Joh 16:27; Joh 21:15-17, 1Co 16:22]), Scripture prefers the word which unambiguously puts human love in the religious sphere on a moral and spiritual basis, even if, in order to do so, it has to leave somewhat of the intensity of the religious affection unexpressed. As designations of the love extending from God to man both and may be used, the former in so far as Gods love is not blind impulse or irrational sentiment, but a love of free self-determination, the latter because it is proper to God by a gracious condescension to enter into that close habitual friendship with man which the word connotes. As a matter of fact, however, is but rarely used to describe the love of God towards man.

In extra-biblical Greek love as extending from the gods to man seems to be an unknown conception, for according to Aristotle and Dio Chrysostom both and have place not in those who rule with reference to those they rule over, but only in the opposite direction: (where is the subject).

It is in keeping with the distinction above drawn that the specific term for brotherly love (see article Brotherly Love) is , for the idea is derived from the family-relation, although, of course, here occurs with equal frequency. On the other hand, of the love for enemies enjoined in the NT never occurs, being excluded by the nature of the case, whereas , involving a deliberate movement of the will, may apply to such a relation.

While it appears from what has been said that had by reason of its inherent signification and classical use an antecedent fitness to express the biblical idea of religious love, this should not be construed to mean that the word carried already in extra-biblical Greek all the content of the Scriptural conception. In the profane usage the moral, spiritual element was yet lacking, although the elements of choice and rational attachment were given. Like so many other words which possessed an antecedent affinity for the biblical world of thought from a formal point of view, it needed the baptism of regeneration in order to become fit for incorporation into the vocabulary of Scripture.

The noun seems to have been coined by the Septuagint to translate the OT conception of religious love. It is not found in classical Greek, nor even with Philo and Josephus. Perhaps the fact that the profane literature does not have the noun is significant. It can be explained on the principle that only through transference into the moral, spiritual sphere could the habitual character of the act of loving, which is inherent in the noun, originate. The noun in the Vulgate is caritas, from carum habere, which admirably expresses the specific character of the biblical conception. Caritas in turn gave rise to the charity of the English Bible (Authorized Version ), in most passages used of love towards fellow-Christians (cf., however, 1Co 8:3, 1Th 3:6, 2Ti 2:22; 2Ti 3:10, where there is no reason so to restrict it). The Revised Version substitutes love, in all passages where the Authorized Version has charity (26 times in all), for the reason that charity has in modern usage become restricted to the love of beneficence or forbearance.

The following discussion confines itself to the love existing between God and man. For love as between man and man see article Brotherly Love.

2. Love in the apostolic teaching.-Love is in the apostolic teaching a central and outstanding trait in the disposition of God towards man. In this respect the view taken by Jesus is fully adhered to. If in the witness of the early Church, as recorded in Acts, no direct affirmation of this principle is made, that can easily be explained from the apologetic purpose of this witness. In the fellowship of the first Christians among themselves the indirect operation of the new force introduced by Jesus into the hearts of His followers manifests itself clearly enough (Act 2:41-47; Act 4:32 ff.)

i. St. Paul.-With St. Paul love is explicitly placed in the foreground as the fundamental disposition in God from which salvation springs and as that which in the possession of God constitutes for the believer the supreme treasure of religion. God is the God of love (2Co 13:11). In Gal 5:22 love is named first among the fruits of the Spirit. It is associated with the Fatherhood of God (Eph 6:23). In the apostolic salutations it stands co-ordinated with the grace of Christ (2Co 13:14, Eph 6:23, 2Th 3:5). It is the greatest of the three fundamental graces of the Christian life, and the sole abiding one of those three (1Co 13:8-13). This primacy love can claim even in comparison with faith. For, on the one hand, faith as well as hope is a grace made necessary by the provisional conditions of the present sinful world, and in both its aspects-that of mediate spiritual perception and that of trust-will be superseded by sight in the world to come (2Co 5:7); on the other hand, faith as compared with love is instrumental, not an end in itself; it brings the Christian into that fundamental relation to God, wherein his religions faculties, foremost among which is love, can function normally (Gal 5:6). The prominence of faith in the Pauline teaching is not therefore indicative of its absolute and final preponderance in the Christian consciousness. It would, however, scarcely be in accordance with St. Pauls view to press the primacy of love to the extent of denying all independent significance to other religious states. There is an aspect in which faith in itself, and apart from its working through love, glorifies God (Rom 4:20), and whatever thus directly contributes to the Divine glory has inherent religious value. The same must be affirmed of the knowledge of God. The emphasis thrown throughout the NT on the value of truth cannot be wholly explained from its soteriological utility. It expresses the conviction that knowing and adoring God are in themselves a religious act, apart from all fructifying influence on the believers life. When St. Paul includes knowledge (1Co 13:8) in the things that shall be done away, this applies only to the specific mode of knowledge in this life, the seeing in a mirror darkly, the knowledge of a child, which will make place in the world to come for a full knowledge face to face, analogous to the Divine knowledge of the believer (1Co 13:12). Knowledge, while of value, is not equal in value to love (1Co 8:3).

(a) The love of God.-It has been alleged that in two respects the Apostles teaching on the love of God marks a retrogression as compared with the gospel of Jesus: on the one hand, St. Paul restricts the love of God to the circle of believers, thus making sonship co-extensive with adoption=justifications; on the other hand, he emphasizes, side by side with love, the working of sovereignty and justice as equally influential attributes in God, whence also the effectual communication of the Divine love to the sinner cannot, according to the Apostle, take place except as a result of the sovereign choice of God and after satisfaction to His justice. This charge, however, rests on a misunderstanding of the teaching of Jesus. Jesus, by way of correction to the prevailing commercial conception of Gods attitude towards man in Judaism, brings forward the love of God. Nevertheless the specific Fatherly love and the corresponding state of sonship are in His gospel, no less than with St. Paul, redemptive conceptions, pertaining not to man as such, but to the disciples, the heirs of the kingdom. This may be seen most clearly from the fact that in its highest aspect sonship is an eschatological attainment (Mat 5:9, Luk 20:36; cf. Rom 8:23). It is true that a developed soteriology like St. Pauls, delimiting the mutual claims or the love and justice of God, is not found in our Lords teaching. But this could not be expected before the supreme saving transaction-the Death of Christ-had actually taken place. The great principles on which the Atonement rests are enunciated with sufficient clearness (Mar 10:45). In comparisons between Jesus and St. Paul it is frequently overlooked that what corresponds to the Apostles soteriology is the eschatological element in Jesus teaching. As a matter of fact, St. Pauls doctrine of salvation was developed in the closest dependence on his eschatology. If the comparison be instituted with this in mind, it will be seen that in our Lords eschatological utterances the sovereignty and justice of God occupy no less central a place than in the Pauline doctrine of salvation, and that the love of God in its eschatological setting is to Jesus as much a redemptive factor as it is in the Pauline gospel.

The phrase the love of God occurs in the Pauline Epistles in Rom 5:5; Rom 8:39, 2Co 13:14, 2Th 3:5, Tit 3:4 (); the love of Christ occurs in Rom 8:35 (variant reading love of God), 2Co 5:14, Eph 3:19; the love of God in Christ in Rom 8:39. In all these cases the genitive is a subjective genitive. In the love of the Spirit (Rom 15:30) the genitive seems to be that of origin (cf. Col 1:8). Some exegetes propose for Rom 5:5 and 2Th 3:5 love towards God. In the former passage the context is decisive against this (cf. 2Th 3:8, and the fact that the consciousness of the love of God furnishes the basis for the certainty of the Christian hope). In 2Th 3:5 the sense is determined by the parallel phrase, ; if this could mean the patient waiting for Christ (Authorized Version ), then would be love for God. Such a rendering, however, seems to be linguistically improbable, and the ordinary interpretation of as patience, steadfastness, requires as a subjective genitive. The meaning is not that the love of God and the patience of Christ are held up as models to the readers, but the Apostle prays that their hearts may be directed to a full reliance on the love of God and the steadfastness of Christ as the two mainsprings of their salvation. In 2Co 5:14 is not to be explained on analogy with the preceding fear of the Lord (2Co 5:11), nor in contrast to the knowledge of Christ after the flesh (2Co 5:18), in the sense of St. Pauls love for Christ; but, in close agreement with the following One died for all, it is meant of the love Christ showed by His Death.

To St. Paul the love of God is throughout a specifically redemptive love. Its manifestation is seldom sought in Nature and providence (Rom 8:28, all things), but regularly in the work of salvation. Since this work culminates in the Death of Christ, the Cross is the crowning manifestation of the Divine love (Rom 5:8). What thus finds supreme expression at its height underlies the entire process as its primordial source. The love of God is to St. Paul the fountain of redemption. It lies behind its objective part, what is theologically called the Atonement, for St. Paul traces this in both its aspects of reconciliation and redemption to the one source. As regards reconciliation, the initiative of love is inherent in the conception itself, since God makes those who were objectively His enemies His friends, creating by the Death of Christ the possibility for His love to manifest itself (Rom 5:8; Rom 5:10-11, 2Co 5:14; 2Co 5:18-21). The idea of redemption has the same implications, for it emphasizes the self-sacrifice of love to which God was put in saving man (Act 20:28, 1Co 6:20; 1Co 7:23). This love is unmerited love, hence its more specific name of ; grace. It is love, not mere mercy or pity, which determines Gods attitude towards the sinner. The mercy is enriched by the love (Eph 2:4). The usual associations of apply to the love of God for sinners only in so far as it is a deliberate movement of the Divine will and purpose, not because there is something admirable or attractive in the spiritual and ethical condition of man which would explain its origin. For the very reason that it springs spontaneously from God without objective motivation, this Divine love is a mystery passing knowledge (Eph 3:19). Salvation on its subjective side is derived by St. Paul even more clearly from the love of God. The gift of the Spirit is a pledge of it to the believer; hence with the pouring forth of the Spirit into the heart, the love of God is poured out therein (Rom 5:5). On the consciousness of this love rests the certainty of hope in the completion of salvation (Rom 5:4-5). St. Paul calls the love underlying the application of redemption , foreknowledge (Rom 8:29); the simple in this specific sense occurs in 1Co 8:3, Gal 4:9, 2Ti 2:19. This term denotes not an intellectual prescience; but, in dependence on the pregnant sense of the Hebrew (Exo 2:25, Hos 13:5, Amo 3:2), it means that God sovereignly sets His affection upon a person. The absoluteness and unconditioned character of this prognosis are such that it can furnish proof for the proposition that all things work together for the good of believers. Hence it fixes as the destiny of believers (predestination) eschatological likeness unto the image of the glorified Christ, and with infallible certainty moves forward through the two intermediate stages of vocation and justification to the goal of this glory (Rom 8:28-30). The conception of , (middle voice, to choose for ones self) has likewise for its correlate the sovereign love of God (Eph 1:4). The association of the redemptive love of God with His prerogative of sovereign choice renders the word especially suitable for describing the relation involved. It is in the interest of emphasizing both the sovereign Divine initiative and the energy and richness of effectuation of redemptive love that St. Paul affirms its eternity (connoted also by the in [Eph 1:4]).

The love of God does not exclude for St. Paul the co-ordination of other attributes in God as jointly determinative of the Divine redemptive procedure. In the Cross of Christ is the great manifestation of love, but it is not the love of God alone that the Cross proclaim. It also demonstrates the = the justice of God (Rom 3:25 ff.). The attempt of Ritschl (Rechtfertigung und Vershnung2, ii. [1882-83], pp. 118, 218ff.) and others to give to in this context the sense of gracious righteousness, making it synonymous with the love of God, breaks down in view of the forbearance of Rom 3:25. If it was forbearance which postponed under the Old Covenant the demonstration of Gods righteousness, then this righteousness is conceived as retributive.

(b) The love of Christ.-The love of Christ St. Paul views chiefly as manifested in His Death (2Co 5:14 f.), or in His life as entered upon and lived with a view to and culminating in His Death (Php 2:5 ff). The Incarnation is an act of self-kenosis, not in the metaphysical, but in the metaphorical sense (Authorized Version made himself of no reputation); hence is described in 2Co 8:9 as a becoming poor. It ought to be noticed that the love of Christ, as well as that of the believer, is in the first place a love for God, and after that a love for man. Christ lives unto God, even in the state of glory (Rom 6:10), and gave Himself in the Atonement: a sacrifice unto God (Eph 5:2).

(c) Love towards God.-The references to the believers love for God are not numerous in the Pauline Epistles. Explicit mention of it is mode in Rom 8:28, 1Co 2:9; 1Co 8:3. From his anti-pietistic standpoint Ritschl would interpret this scarcity of reference in St. Paul and the NT generally (outside of St. Paul only Jam 1:12; Jam 2:5) as due to the feeling that love to God is something hardly within the religious reach of man. He observes that in 1Co 2:9 the phrase them that love God is a quotation, and surmises that the same quotation underlies all the other passages except 1Co 8:3 (op. cit. ii 100). But this is a mere surmise, and St. Paul has at least in one passage appropriated the thought for himself. Besides this the analogy of the love of Christ for God favours the ascription of love for God to the believer. The same living for God which is predicated of Christ (Rom 6:10) is elsewhere attributed to the Christian (Gal 2:19). As Christ sacrificed Himself to God (Eph 5:2), so the believers life is a spiritual sacrifice (Rom 1:9; Rom 12:1). The Fatherhood of God and the sonship of the believer postulate the idea of a mutual love (Rom 8:15). The idea is also implied in the fact that St. Paul places at the beginning of the Christian life a crucifixion and destruction of the love for self and the world (Rom 6:6, Gal 2:19; Gal 6:14), since under the Apostles positive conception of the Christian life something else must take the place of the previous goals. The glorifying of God in all things has for its underlying motive the love of God (Rom 14:8, 1Co 10:31, Eph 1:12).

ii. Pastoral Epistles.-In the Pastoral Epistles the universality of the love of God is emphasized. In the earlier Epistles the Apostles universalism is not deduced from the love of God but from other principles, and is distinctly of an international type. The Pastoral Epistles make of the love of God a universalizing principle and extend it to all men, not merely to men of every nation (1Ti 2:4; 1Ti 2:8; 1Ti 4:10; 1Ti 6:13, Tit 2:11; Tit 3:4). In some of these passages the context clearly indicates that a reference of Gods love to all classes of men is intended (cf. 1Ti 2:4 with 1Ti 2:1-2; Tit 2:11, with Tit 2:2-10). But the emphasis and frequency with which the principle is brought forward render it probable that some specific motive underlies its assertion. So far as the inclusion of magistrates is concerned, there may be a protest against a form of Jewish particularism which deemed it unlawful to pray for pagan magistrates. In the main the passages cited will have to be interpreted as a warning against the dualistic trend of Gnosticism. Gnosticism distinguished between two classes of men, the and the , the latter by their very nature being unsusceptible to, and excluded from, salvation, the former carrying the potency of salvation by nature in themselves. Over against this the Pastorals emphasize that the love of God saves all men, that no man is by his subjective condition either sunk beneath the possibility or raised above the necessity of salvation. Hence the of God in Tit 3:4 is love for man as man, not for any aristocracy of the . This philanthropy is not to be confounded with the classical conception of the same (cf. Act 27:3; Act 28:2), for the latter is not love towards man as such, but simply justice towards ones fellow-man in the several relations of life, and is conceived without regard to the internal disposition. Probably the choice of the word is in Tit 3:4 determined by the preceding description of the conduct required of believers for which the Divine philanthropy furnishes the model. But that its content goes far beyond general benevolence may be seen from this, that it communicates itself through the Christian redemption in the widest sense (Tit 3:5-7). In all this there is nothing either calculated or intended to weaken the Pauline doctrine of the specific elective love of God embracing believers. The Pastorals affirm this no less than the earlier Epistles.

iii. Epistle of James.-The Epistle of James by calling the commandment of love the royal law (Jam 2:8) places love in the centre of religion. This love is not merely love for men but love to God (Jam 2:5). It chooses God and rejects the world, the love for God and the friendship of the world being mutually exclusive (Jam 4:4). It manifests itself in blessing God (Jam 3:9). Behind this love for God, however, St. James, no less than St. Paul and St. John, posits the love of God for the sinner. God is Father of believers (Jam 3:9). They that love God are chosen of God (Jam 2:5). The Divine love is a love of mercy; even in the Day of Judgment it retains the form of mercy (Jam 2:13, Jam 5:20). It is a jealous love, which requires the undivided affection of its object (Jam 4:3). An echo of the Synoptical preaching of Jesus may be found in this that St. James sees the love of God demonstrated in the gifts not merely of redemption, but likewise of providence (Jam 1:17).

iv. Epistles of Peter.-The Epistles of Peter dwell on the love of Christ rather than on that of God. Christs love is a love of self-denial (1Pe 2:21) and of benevolence for evil-doers (1Pe 3:18). To it corresponds love for Christ in the heart of believers. St. Peter shows that this love is strong enough to assert and maintain itself in the face of the invisibleness of Christ (1Pe 1:8; cf. 1Jn 4:20 f.). The love for God and Christ is consistent with and accompanied by fear (1Pe 1:17-18). Gods love is implied in the mercy which lies behind regeneration (1Pe 1:3). God is the Father of believers (1Pe 1:17); they are the flock of God (1Pe 5:2); He (or Christ) is the Shepherd of their souls (1Pe 2:25). The longsuffering of God, as a fruit of the Divine love, is mentioned in 2Pe 3:9.

v. Hebrews.-The theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews-the perfect mediation of priestly approach unto God-coupled with the writers vivid perception of the majesty of God brings it about that the love of God remains in the background. The Epistle emphasizes the fear of God even for believers (Heb 4:1; Heb 4:11-13; Heb 12:29). Still believers are sons of God (Heb 2:10, Heb 12:7), brethren of Christ (Heb 2:11, Heb 12:17). God loves His children as the Father of Spirits (Heb 12:6-10). He is the God of His people in the pregnant sense (Heb 11:16). The subsumption of the greater part of the religious consciousness under faith brings it about that the love of Christians is less spoken of here than elsewhere in the NT. It is mentioned in Heb 6:10 as a love shown towards Gods name, i.e. towards God, in the service of the brethren. The Epistle, on the other hand, makes much of the love of Christ for believers as it assumes the form of mercy. This mercy is, however, not motived by the mere suffering as such, but specifically by the moral aspect of the suffering. It is compassion with the moral weakness and danger arising from suffering, because suffering becomes a source of temptation. Christ can exercise this mercy because He Himself has experienced the tempting power of suffering (Heb 2:18, Heb 4:15).

vi. Johannine Literature.-There still remains to be considered the Johannine literature including the Gospel, so far as the statements of the Evangelist himself are concerned. Both the Gospel and the First Epistle represent love as the ultimate source and the ultimate goal of Christianity. There is this difference, that what is in the Gospel related to Christ as love of Christ and love for Christ, is in the Epistle related to God in both directions. In the Apocalypse love to Jesus appears in Rev 2:4, love of Jesus in Rev 1:5, Rev 3:9. The love of God is not uniformly, as in St. Paul, the love which God shows, but partly this (1Jn 2:5; 1Jn 4:9; 1Jn 4:12) and partly also the love cherished towards God (Joh 5:42, 1Jn 2:15; 1Jn 3:17; 1Jn 5:3). Possibly the construction is meant as an inclusive one: the love which God has made known and which answers to His nature (so B. F. Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, 1883, p. 49). Love is to St. John as to St. Paul a specifically Divine thing. Wherever it appears in man, it must be traced back to God, and particularly to Gods love (1Jn 4:10; 1Jn 4:19). Its source lies in regeneration (1Jn 4:7). The Divine primordial love is grace, not motived by the excellence of human qualities, for it expressed itself in giving Christ as a propitiation for sin (1Jn 4:9-10). The supreme manifestation of Gods love is the gift of Christ, and Christs giving of His own life for man (1Jn 3:16, 1Jn 4:8, Rev 3:9). Hence the Gospel characterizes the love which Jesus showed in His Death as an (to the uttermost). The giving of the Spirit of God is an act of love not merely because the Spirit is an inestimable gift, but because in the Spirit God communicates Himself; herein lies the essence of love (1Jn 3:23; 1Jn 4:13). The highest embodiment of this redemptive love is the state of sonship (1Jn 3:1). The Apocalypse uses for this, as extending to the Church collectively, the OT figure of the bride of God (Rev 19:7; Rev 21:1; Rev 21:9). Sonship is not represented, as in St. Paul, as awaiting its eschatological consummation, but rather as issuing into a higher, yet unknown, state (1Jn 3:2). The summing up of the Christian life in love is represented as a new commandment, which is at the same time old (1Jn 2:7-8, 1Jn 3:11; 1Jn 3:23). It is old in so far as it goes back to the creation (from the beginning [1Jn 2:7, 1Jn 3:11, 2Jn 1:5-6); it is new in so far as through Jesus and His work it has now become an actuality in the life and experience of Christians; hence it is true in him and in you (1Jn 2:8). In both the Gospel and the First Epistle to know God is used as synonymous with loving God. To know is taken in such connexions in the pregnant sense which implies intimacy of acquaintance and the fellowship of affection. At the same time there is in this an indirect protest against the unethical intellectualism of the false Gnosis (1Jn 2:3; 1Jn 4:13-14; 1Jn 3:1; 1Jn 3:6; 1Jn 4:6-8; 1Jn 4:16; 1Jn 5:20).

Both the Gospel and the First Epistle emphasize the universalism of the love of God as demonstrated in the gift of Christ for the sin of the world. In Joh 3:16 the world ( ) seems to be rather qualitatively than quantitatively conceived; the greatness of Gods love is seen in this, that He loves that which is sinful (cf. 1Jn 2:2). Both the Gospel and the Epistle also lay stress on the primacy of love in the character of God (1Jn 4:8; 1Jn 4:16). That the universalism must not be understood as appropriating the love of God in its most pregnant sense to every man indiscriminately appears from such statements as Joh 6:37; Joh 6:39; Joh 6:44; Joh 13:1; Joh 15:19; Joh 17:6; Joh 17:9; Joh 17:12. A predestinarian strand is traceable in St. John as well as in St. Paul. And that the clear statement about the primacy of love in God should not be construed to the exclusion of every other attribute or disposition in God appears plainly from the difference which both the Gospel and the Epistle make between Gods and Christs attitude towards the world and towards believers-a difference inconceivable were there in God no place for aught but love. The statement God is love means to affirm that into His love God puts His entire being, all the strength of His character. In the Apocalypse it is most vividly brought out that in God, besides love for His own, there is wrath for His enemies (cf. even the wrath of the Lamb [6:16]), although it is to be noticed that the Apocalypse speaks as little as the Gospel and the Epistle of Gods hatred towards His enemies. The latter term is reserved for the description of the attitude of the world towards God and Christ and believers. The hatred of the world explains the righteous wrath of God and believers against the world (Joh 3:20; Joh 7:7; Joh 15:18; Joh 15:23-25; Joh 17:14, Rev 2:6).

Literature.-Schmidt, Handbuch der latein. und griech. Synonymik, 1886, pp. 756-768; R. C. Trench, NT Synonyms9, 1901, pp. 41-44; J. A. H. Tittmann, de Synonymis in NT, 1829-32, pp. 50-55; H. Cremer, Bibt.-Theol. Wrterbuch der neutest. Grcitt5, 1911, s.v. ; Deissmann in ThLZ [Note: hLZ Theologische Litteraturzeitung.] , 1912, cols. 522-523; E. Sartorius, The Doctrine of the Divine Love, Eng. translation , 1884; G. Vos, The Scriptural Doctrine of the Love of God, in Presb. and Ref. Review, xiii. [1902] 1-37; W. Ltgert, Die Liebe im NT, 1905.

Geerhardus Vos.

Fuente: Dictionary of the Apostolic Church

LOVE

Consists in approbation of, and inclination towards an object that appears to us as good. It has been distinguished into,

1.Love of esteem, which arises from the mere consideration of some excellency in an object, and belongs either to persons or things.-

2.Love of benevolence, which is an inclination to seek the happiness or welfare of any thing.-

3.Love of complacence, which arises from the consideration of any object agreeable to us, and calculated to afford us pleasure.

Fuente: Theological Dictionary

love

The inclination of an appetite toward a good agreeing with it and adapted to it. There is a natural love common to all creatures, whereby they naturally tend to their own proper good. Love is sensitive or rational in so far as it arises from the apprehension of the senses only, or of human reason. Rational love is the love of concupiscence, or of benevolence, according as its object is cherished for the good of the one loving, or of the one loved. The love of friendship is a love of benevolence between two persons, mutually loving one another, based on a certain communication of goods. Rational love is natural or supernatural according as it proceeds from purely natural or supernatural revealed motives. The supernatural virtue of love (theological virtue of charity), is not acquired but infused. It is a love of God for His own sake, and of fellow man and of self for God’s sake. True love of God and of man are inclusive of one another. The obligation of making acts of supernatural love of God is contained in Holy Writ (Deuteronomy 6; Matthew 22; Luke 10), and urges at the dawn of reason, at the time of death, and at various times during life. Supernatural love of God is also the principle and good of moral perfection. The obligation of loving our fellow man binds whenever our neighbor is in need, and we are in a position to help him. It is regulated by a certain order depending on his nearness to us by reason of relationship, friendship, country, etc., on the nature and extent of his need, and on the inconvenience, injury, or loss we undergo by helping him.

Fuente: New Catholic Dictionary

Love

(prop. , ) is an attachment of the affections to any object, accompanied with an ardent desire to promote its happiness: 1, by abstaining from all that could prove injurious to it; 2, by doing all that call promote its welfare, comfort, or interests, whether it is indifferent to these efforts, or whether it appreciates them. This is what Kant calls practical love, in contradistinction from pathological love, which is a sort of sensual self-love, and a desire for community in compliance with our own feelings. In reality, love is something personal, emanating from a personal being and directed towards another, and thus its moral or immoral character is determined by the fact of its being called forth by the real worth of the personality towards which it is directed, or by the physical appearance of the latter, or by the advantages it may offer.

In the Christian sense, as we find it spoken of in the Word of God, love is not merely a peculiar disposition of the feelings, or a direction of the will of the creature, though this also must have its root in the creative principle, in God. God is love, the original, absolute love (1Jn 4:9). As the absolute love, he is at once subject and object, i.e., he originally loved himself, had communion with himself, imparted himself to himself, as also we see mention made of God’s love before the creation of the world, the love of the Father towards the Son (Joh 17:24), Derived from this love is the love which calls into being and preserves his creatures. Creatures, that is, existences which come from God, are through him and for him; not having life by themselves, but immediately dependent upon God existing by his will, and consequently to be destroyed at his will; created in time, and consequently subject to time, developing themselves in it to the full extent of their nature according to God’s thoughts, with the possibility of departing therefrom, which it were impossible to suppose of God, the eternally real and active idea of himself. In regard to the creature, the divine love is the will of God to communicate to it the fullness of his life, and even the will to impart, according to its receptive faculty, this fullness into something which is not himself, yet which, as coming from God, tends also towards God, and finds its rest in him, and its happiness in doing his will. But, as emanating from an active God this love, with all its fullness, can only be directed towards a similarly organized and consequently personal creature, conscious of its relation to God and of himself as its end, possessing in itself the fullness of created life (microcosm).

It must, then, be man towards whom this divine love is directed as the object of God’s delight, created after his image. This love is manifested in the earnestness of the discipline (commands and threats, Gen 2:17) employed to strengthen this resemblance to God, to educate man as a ruler by obedience, as also by the intercourse of God with man; and, after the fall, by the hope and confidence awakening promises, as well as in the humiliating condemnation to pain, labor, and death. All these contain evidences of love, of this will of God to hold man in his communion, or to restore him to it. At the bottom of it lies an appreciation of his worth, namely, of his inalienable resemblance to God, of the imparted divine breath. This appreciation is also the foundation of compassionate love, for it is only on this ground that man is worthy of the divine affection. But it is also the ground which renders him deserving of punishment. For punishment, this destiny of evil, which is felt as a hinderance of life, is in one respect an expiation, i.e. a retrieving of God’s honor, being incurred by that disregard of the value of his communion with God, and consequently of the real life, which must be considered as injurious to the life of man, and leading him to ruin; on the other hand, it is inducement to conversion, as this consequence of sin leads man to recognize the restoration of this disturbed relation to God as the one thing needful and desirable. Punishment consequently proceeds in both cases on the assumption of the worth of man in the eve of God, and is a proof of it. Hence the anger of God, as manifested by these punishments, is but another form of his love. It is a reaction of rejected love which manifests itself in imparting suffering and pain on the one who rejects it, proving thereby that its rejection is not a matter of indifference to it. This love may not be apparent at first sight, but it is clearly revealed in God’s conduct towards all mankind, as well towards the heathen as towards the chosen people. God allowed the heathen to walk in their own ways (Act 14:17); he allows them to fall into all manner of evil (Rom 1:21 sq.) in order to bring them to a sense of their misery and helplessness as well as of their guilt. But at the bottom of this anger there is still love, and this is clearly shown in the fact that he manifested himself to them in their conscience, and also took care of them (Act 14:17; Act 17:25 sq.).

But, if this love is thus evinced towards the heathen, it is still more clearly manifested towards the chosen people, the fact of their choice being itself a manifestation of that love (Deu 7:6 sq.), which is further shown both in the blessings and punishments, the anger and the mercy, of which they were the objects. Holiness and mercy are the chief characteristics of the divine love as manifested towards Israel; the one raising them above their weaknesess, their evils, and their sins; the other understanding these failings, and seeking to deliver and restore them. But in both also is manifested the constancy of that love, its faithfulness; and the exactitude with which it adheres to the covenant it had itself made evinces its righteousness by saving those who fear God and obey his commandments. Both holiness and mercy are, for the moral, religious consciousness, harmonized in the expiatory sacrifice, in a figurative, typical manner in the O.T., and in a real, absolute manner in the N.T. The divine right in regard to fallen humanity is maintained, the death penalty is paid, but in such a manner that the chief of all, the divine Son of man, who is also Son of God, suffers it for all, of his own free will, and out of love to man, in accordance with the wishes of his Father. Thus the curse of sin and death is removed from humanity, and the possibility of a new existence of righteousness and felicity restored.

The New Covenant is therefore the full revelation of the spirit and object of the divine love. The incarnation of the Son of God is the revelation of God himself, and leads to his self-impartation by the Holy Spirit. Hence the eternal love discloses itself as being, in its inner nature, the love of the Father for the Son, and of the Son for the Father by the Holy Ghost, which proceeds from both, and is the fullness of the love that unites them, whence we can say that. God is love; as also, in its manifestation, it is the divine love towards fallen creatures, which is the will to restore their perfect communion with God by means of the all-sufficient expiatory sacrifice of the God-man, and the communication of the Holy Spirit, by which both the Father and the Son come to dwell in the hearts of men, thus forming a people of God’s own, as was postulated, but not yet realized in the O.T. The love of God in man, therefore, is the consciousness of being loved by God (Rom 5:5), resulting in a powerful impulse of love towards the God who has loved us first in Christ (1Jn 4:19), and an inward and strong affection towards all who are loved by God in Christ (1Jn 4:11); for the divine love, even when dwelling in man, remains all- embracing. This love takes the form of a duty (1Jn 4:11), but at the same time becomes a gradually strengthening inclination. And this is the completion or the ripening of the divine love in man ( ), that it manifests itself in positive results for the advantage of others.

We find the beginning and examples of this love under the old dispensation where mention is made of desire after God, joy in him, eagerness to serve him, zeal in doing everything to please and honor him. The inclination towards those who belong to God, the holy communion of love in God, that characteristic feature of the N.T., is also foreshadowed in the O.T. by the people of God, who are regarded as one in respect to him, and whose close, absolute communion with God is represented by the image of marriage. This image is still repeated in the N.T., nevertheless in such a manner that the union is represented as not yet accomplished; for, though Christ is designated as the bridegroom and the Church as the bride, the wedding is made to coincide with the establishment of his kingdom. Thus considered, the love of God and the furtherance of the love of God are still a figurative expression. God wants the whole heart of his people: one love, one sacrifice, exclusively directed towards him, so that none other should exist beside it; and that all inclinations of love towards any creature should be comprised in it, derived from it, and return to it. On this account his love is called jealous, and he is said to be a jealous God. This jealousy of God, however, this decided requiring of an exclusive submission on the part of his people, is, on the other hand, the tenderest carefulness for their welfare, their honor, and their restoration.

The close connection, indeed the unity of both, is evident. The effect of this jealousy of God is to kindle zeal in those who serve him, and consequently opposition against all that opposes, or even does not conduce to his service. This is a manifestation of love towards God, which love is essentially a return of his own love, and consequently gratitude, accompanied by the highest appreciation, and an earnest desire for communion with him. It includes joy in all that serves God, absolute submission to him, and a desire to do everything for his glory. The love in God, i.e., the love of those who feel themselves bound together by that common bond, is essentially of the same character; but, from the fact of its being directed towards creatures who are afflicted with many failings and infirmities, must also include as distinguished from the love towards God a willingness to forgive, which makes away with all hinderances to full communion, a continual friendliness under all circumstances, consequently patience and gentleness, zeal for their improvement, and sympathy for their failings and misfortunes. But as the love of the creative, redemptive, and sanctifying God, extending further than merely those who have attained to that communion with him, embraces all, so should also the love of those who love God. Yet in the divine love itself there is a distinction made, inasmuch as God’s love towards those who love him and keep his commandments is a strengthening, sustaining pleasure in them (Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23), while his love towards the others is benevolence and pity, which, according to their conduct, the disposition of their hearts. and their receptivity, is either not felt at all by them, or only produces pain, fear o, or, again, hope, desire, etc., but not a feeling of complete, abiding joy. So in the love of the children of God towards the human race we find the distinction between brotherly and universal love (Rom 12:10; Heb 13:1; 1Pe 1:22; 2Pe 1:7). In both we find the characteristics of kindness and benevolence, sympathy, willingness to help, gentleness, and patience; but in the universal love there is wanting the feeling of delight, of an equal aim, a complete reciprocity, of conscious unity in the one highest good.

Love also derives a special determination from the personality, the spiritual and essential organization of the one who loves, and also his particular position. It manifests itself in friendship as a powerful attraction, a hearty sympathy of feelings, a strong desire for being together and enjoying a communion of thoughts and feelings. In sexual love it is a tender reciprocal attraction, a satisfaction in each other as the mutual complement of life, and a desire for absolute and lasting community of existence. Parental, filial, and brotherly love can be considered as a branch of this affection. Both friendship and love have the full sanction of Christian morals when based on the love of God. As wedded love is an image of the relation between the Lord and his people, or the Church (Eph 5:23 sq.), so paternal, filial, and brotherly love are respectively images of the love of God towards his children, of their love towards him, and of their love towards each other. All these relations may want this higher consecration, and yet be well regulated; they have then a moral character. But they may also be disorderly: friendship can be sensual, selfish, and even degenerate into unnatural sexual connection; sexual love may become selfish, having no other object but the gratification of lust; parental love may change to self-love, producing over-indulgence, and fostering the vices of the children; brotherly love can degenerate into flattery and spoiling. Thus this feeling, which in its principle and aim should be the highest and noblest, can become the most common, the worst, and the most unworthy.

Both kinds of love are mentioned in Scripture. The highest and purest tendency of the heart is in the Bible designated by the same name as the more natural, immoral, or disorderly tendency. The same was the case among the Greeks and Romans: , Amor,, and , Venus, had both significations, the noble and the common; but Christianity has in Christ and in his Church the perfect illustration and example of true love, whose absolute type is in the triune life of God himself. This divine love, as it exists in God, and through the divine Spirit in the heart of man, together with the connection of both, is represented to us in Scripture as infinitely deep and pure. We find it thus represented in the Old Testament (see Deu 33:3; Isa 49:13 sq.; Isa 57:17 sq.; Isa 55:7 sq.; Jer 31:20; Jer 32:37 sq.; Eze 34:11 sq.; Hos 3:2 sq.; Mic 7:18 sq.). Then in the whole mission of Christ, and in what he stated of his own love and of the Father’s, see Mat 11:28; Luke 15; Joh 4:10; Joh 4:14; Joh 6:37 sq.; Joh 7:37 sq.; Joh 9:4; Joh 10:12 sq.; Joh 12:35; Joh 13:1; Joh 15:12-13; John 17; and, for the testimony of the apostles, Rom 5:5 sq.; Rom 8:28 sq.; Rom 11:29 sq.; 1 Corinthians 13; Eph 1:3; Eph 1:17 sq.; Eph 5:1 sq.; 1Jn 3:4, etc. These statements are corroborated by the testimony of Christians in all ages, who have all been witness to this love, however much their views may have differed on other points. In later times, ethical essays on the subject have thrown great light on the nature and modes of manifestation of this love; see among them, Daub, Syst. d. christl. Moral, 2:1, page 310; Marheineke, Syst. d. theol. Moral, page 470; Rothe, Theol. Elthik, 2:350. Herzog, Real-Encyklop. 8:388 sq. See Wesleyana, page 54.

Fuente: Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature

Love

This word See ms to require explanation only in the case of its use by our Lord in his interview with “Simon, the son of Jonas,” after his resurrection (John 21:16, 17). When our Lord says, “Lovest thou me?” he uses the Greek word _agapas_; and when Simon answers, he uses the Greek word _philo_, i.e., “I love.” This is the usage in the first and second questions put by our Lord; but in the third our Lord uses Simon’s word. The distinction between these two Greek words is thus fitly described by Trench:, “_Agapan_ has more of judgment and deliberate choice; _philein_ has more of attachment and peculiar personal affection. Thus the ‘Lovest thou’ (Gr. agapas) on the lips of the Lord See ms to Peter at this moment too cold a word, as though his Lord were keeping him at a distance, or at least not inviting him to draw near, as in the passionate yearning of his heart he desired now to do. Therefore he puts by the word and substitutes his own stronger ‘I love’ (Gr. philo) in its room. A second time he does the same. And now he has conquered; for when the Lord demands a third time whether he loves him, he does it in the word which alone will satisfy Peter (‘Lovest thou,’ Gr. phileis), which alone claims from him that personal attachment and affection with which indeed he knows that his heart is full.”

In 1 Cor. 13 the apostle sets forth the excellency of love, as the word “charity” there is rendered in the Revised Version.

Fuente: Easton’s Bible Dictionary

Love

The general word for love in the O.T. is ahav (), from which it has been supposed that its Greek representative is derived; but compare Agav below. It indicates desire, inclination, or affection, whether human or divine in Amo 4:5, it has been rendered by the weaker English word like in a few passages the participial form has been rendered friend, as in 2Sa 19:6, ‘Thou lovest thine enemies, and hatest thy friends;’ 2Ch 20:7 (compare Isa 41:8), ‘Thou gavest thy l and to the seed of Abraham thy friend,’ an expression which St. James singled out for comment in his Epistle (Jam 2:23); Zec 13:6, ‘I was wounded in the house of my friends ;’ see also Est 5:10; Est 5:14; Est 6:13; Pro 14:20; Pro 27:6; Jer 20:4; Jer 20:6 in these passages intimacy and affection, the cleaving of soul to soul, is implied, and ‘lovers’ rather than ‘acquaintances’ are designated. Occasionally the LXX adopts instead of , but never where God’s love is concerned.

Other words rendered love in the A. V. are as follows:–Yedid (), whence the name Jedidiah; rea (–Ass. r), a companion, Son 1:9; Son 1:15; Son 2:10; Son 2:13; Son 5:2; Son 6:4, and Jer 3:1; Agav (), used of impure love, and rendered ‘doting’ in Eze 23:12; Eze 33:31-32; Chashak (), to jo in together, Psa 91:14; dodim (–Ass. dadu), the impulse of the heart, or of sexual affection, Pro 7:18, Eze 16:8; and chesed, mercy.

The Greek is in a measure consecrated by the fact that it makes its first appearance in the LXX, being apparently unknown to early classical authors. It is used in the N.T. to designate the essential nature of God, his regard for mankind, and also the most marked characteristic of the Divine life as manifested in Christ and in Christians. It is unfortunate that the English, with some other languages, should have accepted two renderings for this important word, the Latin word charity being introduced as an alternative for the good old Sax on word love, but it has arisen through fear lest spiritual love should be confused with sensuous affection. The Greek , is never used in the Bible except in Pro 7:18; Pro 30:16.

The word is rarely used in the N.T. But see 1Co 16:22, and especially Joh 21:15-17, where the distinction between love and friendship is noticeable in the Greek, but is lost in the English and other versions.

Fuente: Synonyms of the Old Testament

Love

“The fulfilling of the law” (Rom 13:8; Rom 13:10), the prominent perfection of God (1Jo 4:8; 1Jo 4:16), manifested to us (1Jo 4:10) when we loved not Him (Joh 3:16). Passing our powers of knowledge (Eph 3:19), everlasting (Jer 31:3), free and gratuitous (Hos 14:4), enduring to the end (Joh 13:1). The two Greek words for “love” are distinct: phileo, the love of impulse, ardent affection and feeling; agapao, the love of esteem, regard. Joh 21:15, “Simon, lovest (agapas, esteemest) thou Me?” Agapas sounds too cold to Peter, now burning with love; so he replies, “Thou knowest that I LOVE (philo) Thee.” “Simon, esteemest thou (agapas) Me? … Thou knowest that I LOVE Thee.” At the third time Peter gained his point. “Simon, LOVEST (phileis) thou Me?” Love to one another is the proof to the world of discipleship (Joh 13:35).

Fuente: Fausset’s Bible Dictionary

LOVE

In the language of the Bible, as in most other languages, the word love has a very broad meaning. It may apply to Gods love for people (Deu 7:12-13; Joh 3:16), peoples devotion to God (Psa 91:14; 1Co 8:3), pure sexual love between a man and a woman (Pro 5:18-19; Song of Son 2:4-5), impure sexual activity such as in prostitution (Jer 4:30; Hos 2:12-13), love between members of a family where sexual feelings are not involved (Gen 22:2; Rth 4:15), an attitude of kindness towards others, whether friends or enemies (Lev 19:17-18; 1Sa 18:1; 1Sa 18:16; Mat 5:43-46; Joh 11:3), or the desire for things that brings pleasure or satisfaction (Pro 20:13; 1Ti 6:10).

Where the Bible gives teaching about love, the centre of love is usually the will, not the emotions. Such love is a deliberate attitude, not an uncontrollable feeling (Mat 5:44-46). This characteristic is seen in both divine love and human love. The Bible commands people to love; it commands them to act in a certain way, regardless of how they feel (Deu 11:13; 22:37-39; Joh 13:34; Joh 15:17; Eph 5:25; Tit 2:4; 1Jn 4:20-21).

Christian love does not mean that Christians try to create certain feelings towards others, but that they act towards others the way they know they should (Luk 10:27; Luk 10:29; Luk 10:37). The reason why they so act is that Gods love rules their lives, making them want to do Gods will (Rom 5:5; 2Co 5:14; 1Jn 4:19). The more they act towards others in love, the more favourable their feelings will become towards those people.

Divine love

The love that God has for the sinful human race originates solely in his sovereign will. He loves people because he chooses to love them, not because they in any way deserve his love (Deu 7:7-8; Jer 31:3; Rom 5:8; Eph 1:4; Eph 2:4-5; 1Jn 3:1; 1Jn 4:10).

This was seen clearly in Jesus Christ, who throughout his life helped those in need and by his death saved helpless sinners. Salvation originates in the love of God, and that love found its fullest expression in the cross of Jesus Christ (Mat 14:14; Mar 10:21; Luk 7:13; Joh 3:16; Joh 15:13; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:4-7; Eph 5:25; 1Jn 4:9; see also MERCY). Jesus Christ could perfectly express Gods love, because he and the Father are bound together in a perfect unity in which each loves the other (Joh 3:35; Joh 10:30; Joh 14:31; Joh 15:9; Joh 17:24).

So much is love the dominating characteristic of the divine nature that the Bible declares that God is love. Everything that God says or does is in some way an expression of his love (1Jn 4:8; 1Jn 4:16).

If we find this statement hard to understand when we think of Gods wrath and judgment, the reason is probably that we misunderstand the nature of love. Gods love is not an irrational emotion divorced from justice and righteousness, but a firm and steadfast attitude that earnestly desires the well-being of his creatures. God has such a love for what is right that he reacts in righteous anger against all that is wrong. Gods wrath is the outcome of his love (Hab 1:13; 1Jn 1:5; see WRATH).

God wants to forgive sinners, but because he is a God of love he cannot treat sin as if it does not matter. He cannot ignore it. His act of forgiveness, being based on love, involves dealing with sin. At the same time, because he is a God of love, he provides a way of salvation so that sinners need not suffer the punishment themselves. He has done this by becoming a human being in the person of Jesus Christ and taking the punishment himself on the cross (Joh 1:14-18; Joh 3:16; Rom 5:8; Gal 2:20; 1Jn 4:10; see ATONEMENT).

This same love causes God to discipline, correct and train his children, so that they might grow into the sorts of people that he, in his superior wisdom, wants them to be. Gods love towards his children is an authoritative love; their love in response is an obedient love (Joh 14:15; Joh 14:21; Joh 16:27; 1Jn 2:4-5; 1Jn 4:19; 1Jn 5:2-3). Gods chastisement may seem painful rather than pleasant, but to ask God to cease his chastisement is to ask him to love us less, not more (Heb 12:5-11; see CHASTISEMENT). Love desires perfection in the one who is loved, and will not be satisfied with anything less (Eph 5:25-27; Jam 4:5).

Christians should accept whatever happens to them as being in some way an expression of Gods love and as being in accordance with Gods purposes for them (Rom 8:28; see PROVIDENCE). Gods gift of his Son is the guarantee that all his other gifts will also be an expression of his love (Rom 8:32). His love is everlasting and measureless. Nothing in life or death can separate believers from it (Jer 31:3; Rom 8:35-39; Eph 3:18-19).

Human love

Those whom God created have a duty to love him with their whole being. They are to be devoted to him and obedient to him (Deu 6:5; Deu 10:12; Psa 18:1-3; Mat 22:37). As a result of such devoted obedience they will learn more of the meaning of Gods love and so will increasingly experience joyful fellowship with him (Psa 116:1-4; Joh 14:21-23; 1Co 2:9; 1Co 8:3; 1Pe 1:8; 1Jn 4:7; 1Jn 4:12; 1Jn 4:19).

Love for God will at times create difficulties. Conflicts will arise as people put loyalty to God before all other loyalties, desires and ambitions (Mat 6:24; Mat 10:37-39; Joh 3:19; 1Jn 2:15-17). Genuine love involves self-sacrifice (Eph 5:25; cf. Rom 14:15; 1Co 13:4-7).

Faith and obedience are just as basic to a relationship with God as is love. If people claim to love God but do not trust in him or obey him, they are deceiving themselves (Joh 14:15; Joh 14:24; Gal 5:6; Jam 2:5). Likewise they are deceiving themselves if they claim to love God but do not love their fellow human beings (Rom 13:10; 1Jn 3:10; 1Jn 3:17; 1Jn 4:8; 1Jn 4:20). Christians must have the same loving concern for others as they have for themselves (Mat 22:39; Php 2:4). Love is a characteristic of those in whom the Spirit of Christ dwells; for when they receive Gods salvation in Christ, the Holy Spirit fills them with Gods love (Joh 15:9-10; Rom 5:5; Gal 5:22; Eph 3:17-19; Eph 5:1-2).

Christians should exercise this love towards everyone, and in particular towards fellow Christians (Joh 13:34; Joh 15:12-17; Gal 6:10; 1Pe 3:8; 1Jn 3:16-17). Such an exercise of love provides evidence that they really are Christians (Joh 13:35; 1Jn 3:14) and helps them grow towards spiritual maturity (1Jn 4:12; 1Jn 4:17). The church of God is founded upon love and builds itself up through love (Eph 3:17; Eph 4:16). A unity of love between Christians will be clear evidence to the world that the claims of Christianity are true (Joh 17:20-23).

Although love for each other is something God demands, people should not practise that love solely as a legal requirement. They must act sincerely and display right attitudes, even when they feel no natural affection for the person concerned (Exo 23:4-5; Lev 19:17-18; Rom 12:9; 1Co 13:4-7; 1Ti 1:5). Good deeds may be worthless in Gods sight if they do not arise out of sincere love (1Co 13:1-3; Rev 2:2-4).

Steadfast love

In the Old Testament the special love that God had for Israel was signified by the Hebrew word chesed. It is difficult to find an exact equivalent of this word in English. The RSV translates it mainly as steadfast love, the GNB as constant love, and the older English versions as mercy, kindness and loving kindness (cf. Gen 32:10; Gen 39:21; Psa 100:5; Psa 118:1-3; Isa 54:10; Hos 2:19; Mic 7:18).

The distinctive feature of chesed is covenant loyalty or faithfulness. A covenant is an agreement between two parties that carries with it obligations and blessings, and in the case of God and Israel this covenant was likened to the marriage bond. The two parties were bound to be loyal to each other (Deu 7:9; Deu 7:12; Neh 1:5; see COVENANT). God exercised loyal love and covenant faithfulness to his people, and this was to be the basis of their trust in him (1Ki 8:23; Psa 13:5; Psa 25:7; Psa 103:17; Psa 136:25; Hos 2:19; Mic 7:20). Yet so often the people were not faithful to God in return. Their covenant love vanished (Hos 6:4; Hos 11:1-4).

This chesed this faithful devotion, this loyal love is what God most desires from his people (Hos 6:6). It also shows the quality of love that God requires his people to exercise towards others (Pro 3:3-4; Hos 12:6; Mic 6:8).

Fuente: Bridgeway Bible Dictionary

Love

LOVE.In the word love is concentrated, we may say, the essence of the Christian religion. It is love that is the outstanding feature in the revelation Christ has given us of the nature of God, love that is the controlling power in the life of the Son who claimed that he that had seen Him had seen the Father (Joh 14:9). On the two commandments to love God and to love our neighbour, Christ declares that all the Law and the Prophets hang (Mat 22:40). In the commandment to love one another as He has loved them, He sums up the new law which He lays upon His disciples, declaring that by their fulfilment of it the faithfulness of their discipleship shall be known (Joh 13:34 f.). We propose to exhibit from different points of view the place which love holds in the doctrine of Christ.

1. The love of God for man.It is certainly true, as has been pointed out, that Christ does not, in the Synoptic Gospels, speak directly of the love () of God. But if He does not thus expressly predicate love of God, it is because He has already endowed Him, as subject, with this love in the highest degree. The doctrine of the Fatherhood of God, which is the foundation of the whole gospel of Christ, contains within it the fullest recognition of the love of God. If the Apostolic writers of the NT expand with greater fulness the doctrine of the Divine love, they are only making explicit the truth involved in the assurance of the Fatherhood of God set forth on every page of the Synoptic Gospels. The God whose love is the constant theme of St. Pauls preaching is the Father-God of Jesus Christ (so H. Holtzmann interprets the Pauline formula , Neutest. Theol. i. 171). In the one word Abba, which Christian lips have learned to repeat after the Master, there lies to St. Paul the assurance of the Divine love which can banish the old feeling of bondage and inspire the spirit of adoption (Rom 8:15). The Johannine doctrine that God is love (1Jn 4:8) is but the statement in abstract terms of the truth to which Christ has given concrete expression in the doctrine of the Fatherhood of God. For it is the love of God that Christ will express by this name which is so constantly on His lips. He speaks of God not only as His own Father (My Father), or as the Father of those who are members of the Kingdom of God (your Father), but as the Father absolutely (Mat 11:27, Mar 13:32, Luk 11:13). The title suggests more than the relation in which God stands to mankind as their Creator. In Mat 5:44-48 Christ urges His hearers to become Gods sons by showing a love like to that of their Father in heaven, for he maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and on the unjust. Did Fatherhood mean merely Creatorship, there could be no question of becoming the sons of God. All men are Gods creatures. The fact that Christ speaks of our becoming Gods sons, proves that He is using the terms Father and sons in an ethical sense. By Fatherhood He indicates the love which God cherishes for men, by sonship the love by which they may prove themselves like in character to this Father whose nature is love. This love suggested by the name Father is the very essence of the Divine nature. It is not merely one among the various attributes of God. It is the supreme and dominating element in the Divine character. It is in it that the Divine perfection lies; and when Christ urges us to be perfect as our Father in heaven is perfect (Mat 5:48), it is evident from the context that it is of the love of God that He is thinking, a fact recognized by Lk., who substitutes merciful for the perfect of Mt.s version (Luk 6:36).

This love of the Father in heaven is the foundation upon which the gospel of Christ rests. It is all-embracing. God is the Father not only of those who are members of the Kingdom of God, i.e. of those who by the love which animates them prove themselves to be His sons (Mat 5:45), but of all men. The evil as well as the good, the unjust as well as the just, are the objects of His love (ib.); and if the facts to which Christ refers, in this connexion, in proof of the universality of the Fathers love, do not go beyond such natural blessings as the sunshine and the rain, that is explained on the ground that these blessings require for their appreciation no special receptivity on the part of those who enjoy them (Beyschlag, Neutest. Theol. i. 81). The Father cares for all. Each individual is precious in His sight. It is not the will of your Father which is in heaven, that one of these little ones should perish (Mat 18:14). The very hairs of our head are all numbered (Mat 10:30). There is joy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth (Luk 15:7; Luk 15:10). In the fact of Gods Fatherhood there lies the assurance that He will certainly give good things to them that ask (Mat 7:11; Mat 18:19), and that He will welcome the penitent sinner who turns to Him (Luk 15:11-32). It is the Fathers good pleasure, Christ assures us, to give us the Kingdom (Luk 12:32), that greatest of all blessings, to obtain which a man might well be willing to sacrifice everything else (Mat 13:44-46); and with it He gives us all such material blessings as He sees to be necessary for us (Luk 12:31, Mat 6:33). When we thus gather together the various utterances of Christ with regard to the God whom He reveals to us as Father, when we think of the assurance that name breathes of bountiful providence, of watchful care, of forgiving love, when we remember, above all, how Christ points to the Fathers unfailing goodness towards the undeserving as an instance of the Divine perfection, we must confess that though the Synoptic Gospels contain no direct mention of the love of God, the Being whose character the Saviour seeks to reveal to us by that name Father is one whose very nature is love.

In the Fourth Gospel it is the same representation of the nature of God that meets us. Here, too, Father is the favourite designation. It has been questioned, indeed, whether the title Father has the same significance in the Fourth Gospel as in the Synoptics. H. Holtzmann (Neutest. Theol. ii. 433 f.) maintains that in the constantly recurring designation of God as the Father there is always either an express or a tacit reference to the Son. [For a full discussion of the use of the word Father in St. John, see Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, pp. 2934]. But there are occasions on which we feel that the title is used in a manner which suggests a reflexion on the love of God quite in the manner of the Synoptics, as when Christ says to the disciples that whatever they shall ask the Father in His name He will give (Joh 15:16; Joh 16:23), or when He tells them that He does not say that He will pray the Father for them, for the Father Himself loveth them (Joh 16:26 f.). And in any case the question of the significance attaching to the title Father in the Fourth Gospel is of minor interest in our present inquiry, since that Gospel contains many express declarations of the love of God, the absence of which makes the question of the significance of that title in the Synoptics matter of importance. These express references to the love of God in the Fourth Gospel occur specially in connexion with that aspect of the Divine love which we proceed to consider under the following head.

2. The love of God for man as manifested in Christ.The highest proof of the Fathers love is given in the mission and Person of the Son. This aspect of the Divine love, which is emphasized in the Fourth Gospel, is not unknown in the Synoptics, though it is rather implied than expressed. If the love of the Father is manifested in the bestowal of the Messianic Kingdom (Luk 12:32), that Kingdom which has been prepared for His children from the foundation of the world (Mat 25:34), and which is now about to come with power (Mar 9:1), then the sending of the Son (Mat 10:40; Mat 21:37) to inaugurate the Kingdom must in itself be an evidence of the love of God. All things are delivered unto the Son of the Father, and He alone can reveal the Father to man (Mat 11:27, Luk 10:22). And this revelation is not confined to His preaching. It embraces the whole of His Messianic work. That work was from beginning to end animated by the spirit of love. He pointed to His works of healing as proof that the Messianic era had arrived (Mat 11:5; Mat 12:28). He described His daily work on one occasion as casting out devils and doing cures (Luk 13:32). He called to all who laboured and were heavy laden to come to Him and He would give them rest (Mat 11:28). As He had assured men of the forgiving love of God, so He declared that He came not to call the righteous but sinners (Mar 2:17), and on occasion announced the forgiveness of their sins to those who approached Him (Mar 2:5, Luk 7:47 f.). His whole ministry was one continual mission of love, culminating in the willing sacrifice of His own life as a ransom for many (Mar 10:45). If we look for the revelation which the Son gives of the Father, not only to His preaching but to His Person and work, then we must admit that that revelation is one which confirms at every point the assurance of Gods boundless love for man conveyed by the gracious title by which Christ designates Him.

But this aspect of the matter is not emphasized in the Synoptics as it is in the Fourth Gospel. Here the mission of the only-begotten Son for the salvation of man is expressly cited as a proof of the vastness of the love of God (Joh 3:16 f.); and whatever question there may be as to the metaphysical relation suggested by that word only-begotten, there can be none as to the depth of the love involved in the sacrifice of the Son so designated. We may note not only the depth but the wideness of the love here proclaimed. God gives His Son for the salvation of the world. This wider outlook in connexion with the work of Christ is characteristic of the Fourth Gospel (O. Holtzmann, Johannesevangelium, 49 f., 80 ff.). Christ is the Saviour of the world (Joh 4:42), the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world (Joh 1:29). He speaks to the world (Joh 8:26), gives His flesh for the life of the world (Joh 6:51), is the light of the world (Joh 9:5, Joh 12:46). Into this world burdened with sin (Joh 1:29) and animated by a spirit of hostility to Himself (Joh 12:31, Joh 17:14), God in His infinite love has sent His Son for its deliverance (Joh 3:17). Throughout the whole Gospel there is far more prominence given than in the Synoptics to the fact that Christ has been sent by the Father (Joh 5:37, Joh 7:16, Joh 8:16; Joh 8:28 etc.). He repeatedly refers to Himself as Him whom the Father hath sent (Joh 5:38, Joh 6:29, Joh 10:36, Joh 17:3). He is not come of Himself (Joh 7:28), but is come in the name of His Father (Joh 5:43) from whom He has come forth (Joh 8:42, Joh 16:27, Joh 17:8). Not only does the Son, as in the Synoptics, claim to reveal the Father as none other, He asserts that He is in the Father and the Father in Him (Joh 10:38, Joh 14:10; Joh 14:20, Joh 17:21; Joh 17:23). He and the Father are one (Joh 10:30, Joh 17:22). The words that He speaks have been given Him by His Father (Joh 7:16 f., Joh 12:49 f., Joh 14:10; Joh 14:24, Joh 17:8). The works that He does are the works of His Father who dwelleth in Him (Joh 14:10). He that hath seen Him hath seen the Father (Joh 14:9). As it is love that has inspired the Father in the mission of His Son, so it is love that is the animating principle in the life of the Son who is one with the Fatherlove to the Father on the one hand (Joh 14:31), and love to His own in the world on the other (Joh 13:1, Joh 15:13). As the Father has loved Him, so He has loved His disciples (Joh 15:9). He sets His love before them as an example, and bids them love one another as He has loved them (Joh 13:34, Joh 15:12). The highest proof of His love is given in His death (Joh 10:15, Joh 15:13). The Son lays down His life willingly in obedience to the commandment of the Father (Joh 10:17 f.). For this the Father has given the Son (Joh 3:16 , if not to be restricted to the giving to the death, may be taken, in view of Joh 3:14, cf. Joh 12:32, to include this reference); and the result will be the consummation of the gracious purpose which animated the Father in the giving of the Son. The cross will become the centre of attraction. Through it Christ will draw all men unto Him (Joh 12:32, Joh 8:28, Joh 11:52, cf. Joh 10:15 f.), and gain the victory over the prince of this world (Joh 12:31). Thus will the love which impelled the Father to the sacrifice of the Son gain the end it seeks to attain, mans deliverance from the destruction which threatens him, and participation in the blessing of everlasting life (Joh 3:15 f., Joh 6:40).

Such is the aspect under which the love of God is presented in the Fourth Gospel. It is in the Person of Christ that we have the full and complete revelation of that love. He is Gods love incarnate. The Prologue gives the keynote to the whole Gospel. Christ is the Word become flesh, the perfect revelation in human personality of the Divine nature. He is the only-begotten Son (or only-begotten God, if we adopt the reading instead of ), who has declared the Father to us (Joh 1:18). With God in the beginning (Joh 1:2), He was made flesh, and dwelt among us (v. 14). The glory that we behold in Him is a full revelation of the Divine glory, for His relation to the Father is that of an only son who receives the whole of his fathers inheritance (ib.). And that glory is the glory of one who reflected in His own person the Divine love, who was full of grace and truth (ib.), and of whose fulness we have received, in ever increasing measure, participating in the grace which flowed from Him.

3. The mutual love of God and Christ.The words Father and Son as applied by Christ to God and man in their relations to one another have, as we have seen, an ethical significance. It is by His love that God proves Himself the Father. It is by exhibiting a love like to that which God displays that man becomes the son of God (Mat 5:45). The terms do not lose their ethical content when used to describe the relation in which God and Christ stand to one another. The God whom Christ revealed to men as the Father He had known first of all as His own Father. Such He had felt Him to be from His childhood (Luk 2:49). So He addressed Him in prayer (Mat 11:25 f., Mar 14:36, Luk 23:46); so He spoke of Him to others (Mat 10:32 f., Mat 11:27; Mat 18:19; Mat 18:35, Luk 22:29). He knew Himself to be in a special sense the object of the Divine love. He had been anointed of the Spirit for the performance of the work for which He was sent (Mar 1:10, Luk 4:18-21), and endowed with a power whereby He might triumph over every hostile influence (Luk 10:19; Luk 11:20). In a remarkable utterance (Luk 10:22, Mat 11:27) Christ describes the intimate relationship in which the Father and He stand to one another, All things are delivered to me of my Father; and no man knoweth who the Son is but the Father; and who the Father is but the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him. The mutual knowledge which Father and Son have of one another is based upon that mutual love indicated by the terms Father and Son. Christ claims to be able to reveal God in His character of Father ( ) as no one else, for none can have such knowledge of the Fathers love as the Son, who knows Himself to be in the supreme degree the object of that love (Mar 1:10), and can say of Himself that all things are delivered unto Him of His Father, i.e. all things necessary for the fulfilment of the Fathers gracious purpose. And the Father can reveal Himself thus to the Son because of the love with which that Son responds to His love, and the meekness and submission with which He surrenders Himself to the Fathers will (Mat 11:29, Mar 14:36). It is evident that in this striking word of Christs regarding the mutual knowledge of the Father and the Son, the words Father and Son are not mere names to denote the persons concerned, but are used to suggest that mutual love upon which the knowledge is based. And indeed all through the Synoptic Gospels there is always a suggestion of this relationship of mutual love in the manner in which God and Christ are spoken of as Father and Son. Whether, when Christ is spoken of in the Synoptics as the Son of God, there is more than this ethical relationship implied, is a question upon which there is difference of opinion. But it is admitted, even by those who attach a deeper significance to the designation, that, in the first instance at any rate, it has an ethical content, and that, when Christ is called the Son of God, whatever more may be implied, so much in any case is suggested, that on the one nand He is the supreme object of the Fathers love, and that on the other He exhibits in His Person in its perfection that loving obedience whereby man may become the son of God.

In the Fourth Gospel the references to the love of the Father and the Son to one another are more frequent and more express. Christ is the only begotten Son (Joh 3:16), loved by the Father before the foundation of the world (Joh 17:24), and now returned to the bosom of the Father (Joh 1:18). He and the Father know one another intimately (Joh 10:15). The Father loves Him, and has given all things into His hand (Joh 3:35). As in the Synoptic account of the announcement at the Baptism, Christ is called the beloved Son in whom God is well pleased (Mar 1:11), so in Jn. the love of the Father is occasionally represented as being based upon the Sons obedience to the Fathers commandment (Joh 15:10) and willing sacrifice of Himself (Joh 10:17). The Father never leaves Him alone (Joh 16:32), for He does always those things that please Him (Joh 8:29). Because He keeps His Fathers commandments He abides in His love (Joh 15:10). No higher estimate can be given of the Saviours love for His disciples than to say that He has loved them as His Father has loved Him (Joh 15:9), nor of the love of God for believers than to compare it to that of the Father for the Son (Joh 17:23). Sometimes the love of God for believers is represented as based upon that of the Father for the Son (Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23, Joh 16:27).

And as the Father loves the Son, so the Son loves the Father. He alone has seen and known the Father (Joh 3:11; Joh 3:32, Joh 6:46, Joh 7:29, Joh 8:55, Joh 10:15). He does nothing of Himself, but only what He seeth the Father do (Joh 5:19). He speaks only as His Father hath taught Him (Joh 8:28, Joh 12:50). His meat is to do the will of Him that sent Him (Joh 4:34). It is love to the Father (Joh 14:31) no less than love to His brethren (Joh 13:1, Joh 15:13) that is the motive that animates Him in the fulfilment of His vocation. In virtue of the love which unites them one to the other, each may be said to be in the other, the Son in the Father and the Father in the Son (Joh 10:38, Joh 14:10; Joh 14:20, Joh 17:21; Joh 17:23). They have no separate interests. Whatever belongs to the one belongs to the other (Joh 17:10). The Father and the Son are one (Joh 10:30, Joh 17:22).

4. The love of man for God.There is comparatively little under this heading to be found in the Gospels. It is true that Christ has Himself given as the first commandment of all, that which enjoins the love of God with the whole heart and soul and mind and strength (Mar 12:28 ff.), and in the same spirit in the Fourth Gospel He finds the final explanation of the unbelief of the Jews in their lack of this love of God (Joh 5:42). But so far as the former of these passages is concerned, it is evident that Christs answer to the scribe is purposely couched in language borrowed from the Old Testament; and it is a noteworthy fact that at other times, when He has no occasion to conform to OT modes of expression, Christ does not give prominence to the duty of love towards God.

Ritschl has drawn attention to the fact of how small a part the love of man towards God plays throughout the NT as a whole. Love is reserved as the characteristic of God and Gods Son in the foundation and guidance of the congregation, while of its members faith or trust in God and His Son is demanded (Rechtf. u. Vers. ii. 100 f.). B. Weiss thinks that Christ keeps the commandment of love to God in the background, because where the love of God does not awaken such love in return it would be of no avail to demand it (Bib. Theol. of NT, 25b). Wendt, while recognizing that the idea of love corresponds well, on the whole, to the filial relationship, believes that it is too general, and does not give sufficient prominence to the relation of subordination and complete dependence in which man stands to God. To express the feeling of whole-hearted devotion to God suggested by the idea of love, while at the same time giving full recognition to His infinite love and power, Christ selected the term trust () as the one most suitable to describe the disposition man should display (Lehre Jesu, ii. 227).

Whatever the reason, we must recognize the fact that neither in the Synoptics nor in the Fourth Gospel, with the exception of the passages referred to, do we find Christ dwelling on the love which man should cherish towards God. But though He speaks of mans trust in God rather than of his love towards Him, we must not overlook the fact that this trust which Christ seeks to inspire is but love under a slightly different form. It is the response of the human heart to the infinite love of God,love on the part of man awakened by the love of God, yet humbling itself in the presence of One who, though the Father, is yet Lord of heaven and earth. Without love there can be no such trust as Christ seeks to inspire. The prayer in which this trust finds expression must be the outpouring of a heart full of love to God and of zeal for the establishment of His Kingdom. The righteousness which becomes the members of the Kingdom must be righteousness not of outward conduct alone, but of a heart which takes delight in the performance of the Divine will. The believer is to seek first the Kingdom and the righteousness of God (Mat 6:33), to have his heart fixed on the heavenly treasure (Mat 6:21), to be filled with whole-hearted devotion to the service of God (Mat 6:24), and to renounce, no matter at what cost, whatever may hinder him in the attainment of the great end set before him (Mar 9:43-48, cf. Mat 13:44 ff.). Though there may be little explicit reference in the teaching of Christ to the love for God which man is required to cherish, we feel that in the case of the believer no less than in that of Christ Himself, it is the source from which springs all the strength for the performance of duty and the endurance of suffering, and that, just as Christ accounted for the unbelief of the Jews by the utter lack in them of this love of God (Joh 5:42), so, if we trace back to its beginnings the faith which the gospel inspires, it will be found to issue from the love to the Father who has revealed Himself in Christ.

5. The love of man for Christ.Of love for Christ there is almost no mention in the Synoptics. In one utterance, indeed, Christ requires His followers to love Him more than their closest earthly relatives (Mat 10:37). But the purpose of that saying, as is proved by the parallel passage, Luk 14:26, is not so much to insist on a personal affection for Himself as the condition of discipleship, as to emphasize the supreme worth of the good represented by His own Person, compared with which the joys of family life are to be esteemed as nothing. The nearest approach to any reference to love of Himself as a motive for conduct is to be found in those passages in which He puts His own Person in the foreground, requiring of His disciples a readiness to sacrifice themselves for His sake (Mar 8:35; Mar 10:29), and attaching high importance to the most trivial acts done in His name (Mar 9:37; Mar 9:41). On these occasions He identifies Himself with His cause. When He requires devotion to Himself, it is only another way of requiring devotion to the truth revealed in His Person. Thus He speaks of sufferings borne for His sake and the gospels (Mar 8:35; Mar 10:29, cf. Luk 18:29), and of being ashamed of Him and of His words (Mar 8:38, Luk 9:26). In this spirit He welcomed the love displayed by the woman who anointed His feet in the Pharisees house, as a proof of the sincerity of the repentance which filled her heart, and of the vastness of the blessings she was conscious of having received (Luk 7:47).

In the Fourth Gospel, where the personal relation to Christ is so strongly emphasized, there is more direct reference to love as the disposition the believer may be expected to display towards Christ. Jesus tells the Jews that if God were their Father they would love Him, for He proceeded forth and is come from God (Joh 8:42). Of the disciples He says, on the other hand, that the Father loveth them because they have loved Him, and have believed that He came from God (Joh 16:27). Something is, indeed, still lacking in their love. He tells them in His farewell address that if they loved Him they would rejoice because He said that He went unto the Father (Joh 14:28). But though their love be not perfect, He can confidently reckon upon it. He would only remind them, as He does more than once in the course of that address, that a true love for Him will manifest itself in the keeping of His commandments (Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23 f.). So it had been with His own love for the Father (Joh 14:31). So let it be with the disciples. Let them prove the sincerity of their love to Him by the loyalty of their obedience. Such a relationship to Himself, love manifesting itself in faithful fulfilment of His commandments, is the condition upon which the giving of the Paraclete is promised (Joh 14:15 ff.). Where it exists, Christ promises the enjoyment of the closest communion with the Father and Himself (Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23). It is quite in keeping with the emphasis that has been laid upon love throughout the Gospel as the relation which must exist between the disciple and Christ, that in the final scene with Peter in the Epilogue He should thrice address to him the question, Lovest thou me? (Joh 21:15-17), as if to suggest that such love is the indispensable qualification on the part of one who would be a true shepherd of Christs flock.

In view of these quotations, it is difficult to understand Ritschls statement (Rechtf. u. Vers. iii. 560), that, apart from Joh 21:15-16, there is no reference in the NT to love towards Christ. Certainly it is the case that, for the most part, faith is the usual formula to indicate the relation of the believer to Him. But it is quite in accordance with the general character of this Gospel, with its conception of a mystical union between the believer and Christ (Joh 15:1 ff.), to use warmer colours to paint the devotion of the believer, and to describe that complete self-surrender to Christ, which is the true relation to Him, as the work of love.

6. The love of man to man.Alongside of the first great commandment to love the Lord our God, Christ places a second, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself (Mar 12:31). The high importance He assigned to this duty is evident from the place He gives it alongside of the commandment to love God. There is none other commandment greater than these (ib.). Both are ethical in their nature. The ceremonial observances in which Christs contemporaries thought to find the fulfilment of this first commandment are never to be allowed to stand in the way of the performance of the offices of love towards our fellow-men. These latter, because they are ethical, are the weightier matters of the Law which are on no account to be omitted (Mat 23:23). To refuse to support ones parents, on the plea that one desires to make an offering of the money that might be used for this purpose, is to make a travesty of religion (Mar 7:9-13). The ethical stands above the ceremonial. God desires mercy, not sacrifice (Mat 12:7). The first commandment may be to love the Lord our God, but when it is a question of showing love towards our brother man or performing some act of worship towards God, there can be no doubt which is to come first, Leave there thy gift before the altar, and first go thy way; be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift (Mat 5:23 f.).

In the enunciation of this second great commandment, Christ specifies the love which men are required to show for one another as the love of ones neighbour. Doubtless the word was suggested by the precept from Leviticus which He quoted, just as the form of the first commandment is based, as we have seen, upon the language of Deuteronomy. When we inquire as to the wideness of the circle denoted by the term neighbour, we seem to find an answer in the parable of the Good Samaritan, which was told, according to Lk., in response to the question that had been put, Who is my neighbour? (Luk 10:29-37). But in its present form that parable gives no satisfactory answer to the question. After telling the story of what befell the traveller, how he was maltreated by the thieves and passed by in his miserable plight by the priest and the Levite, and how at last the Samaritan took compassion on him, Christ asks, Which now of those three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? The answer is, the Samaritan; and the conclusion of the parable seems to be that it was the travellers duty to love the Samaritan, i.e. that the term neighbour is wider than the lawyer who had put the question seemed to imagine, and must be held to embrace any who by their conduct prove themselves worthy of the name, whether they be Jews or not (so Wendt, Lehre Jesu, ii. 268). This is certainly the logical conclusion from the parable as it at present stands, but it is questionable whether this can have been the lesson Christ desired to enforce by it. It starts with the object of proving who is ones neighbour in the sense of diligendus (Luk 10:29), and ends by proving who is the travellers neighbour in the sense of diligens, Luk 10:36 (Jlicher, Die Gleichnisreden Jesu, ii. 596). The nearest approach that it reaches to a definition of the term neighbour in the sense required is contained in the Go and do thou likewise with which it concludes. The usual method of interpreting the parable is to find the answer to the question in the practical lesson enforced by that exhortation, and to conclude that our neighbour is anyone who requires our help. But in view of the immediately preceding statement that the neighbour of the traveller was the Samaritan who had compassion on him, it seems utterly incongruous to conclude that the design of the parable is to teach that ones neighbour is not ones benefactor, but anyone that one can benefit, i.e. in this case that the traveller was the neighbour of the Samaritan. So we can only conclude that Lk. is responsible for the introduction of the parable in connexion with this question of the lawyers, and that whatever the original purpose for which it was related, it was certainly not designed to give an answer to the question, Who is my neighbour? in the sense of Who is the person I am required to love?

But the precise scope of the term neighbour in the mouth of Christ is of the less importance, as it is only on the occasion of His interview with the scribe (Mar 12:28-34, Mat 22:35-40) that He thus defines the limits within which one is to show love towards ones fellow-men, and there, as we have seen, He is evidently formulating His answer in the language of the OT commandment. In opposition to the narrow sense in which the term neighbour was interpreted by His contemporaries, who could add to the injunction to love their neighbour a corollary to the effect that they were to hate their enemy (Mat 5:43), Christ enjoined a love which was to embrace both friend and enemy (Mat 5:44 f.). The Golden Rule which Christ has given men to guide them in their offices of love takes us far beyond the circle of neighbours in the narrow Jewish sense. The command runs, All things whatsoever ye would that men (not your neighbours) should do unto you, do ye even so to them (Mat 7:12). We are to show love to all. Whosoever shall smite thee, if any man will sue thee, whosoever shall compel thee, he that asketh thee, he that would borrow of thee,these are the phrases with which Christ introduces those to whom He commands His disciples to show love (Mat 5:39-42). Sometimes He describes them as brothers (Mat 5:22; Mat 5:24, Mat 7:3-5, Mat 18:15; Mat 18:21 f., Mat 18:35), not in the sense of those who are bound to us by natural ties, in which sense brotherly love is practised by the Gentiles as well (Mat 5:47), nor in the sense of fellow-citizens of the Kingdom of God (so B. Weiss; Westcott, The Epistles of St. John, note on 1Jn 2:9), in which sense the word would reproduce in a new form the limitation that attached to the Jewish interpretation of the term neighbour, but in the same wide sense as He applies the term Father to God. He is the Father not only of the members of the Kingdom, but of all mankind (Mat 5:45), and by using the term brother to denote the objects of our love, Christ will suggest that it is to be a love as wide and all-embracing as that of the Father in heaven, who bestows His bounties on good and evil,a love not only of those who are members of the Kingdom of God, but of all who have the right to look up and claim God as their Father in heaven (Wendt, Lehre Jesu, ii. 270 f.). The command to forgive our brother his trespasses (Mat 18:35) is interpreted in the widest sense in Mat 6:14 f., when, in place of forgiving our brother, Christ speaks of forgiving men their trespasses.

From various occasional utterances of Christ we can form a general idea of the nature of the love which He expects men to display in their relations to one another. Its unselfishness on the one side, and its interest in the welfare of others on the other, are features which continually appear in the exhortations in which He seeks to inculcate it. In illustration of the unselfish spirit which He commends, He urges His hearers to invite to their banquets not their friends and kinsmen who may invite them in return, but the poor, the maimed, the lame and the blind, who cannot recompense them (Luk 14:12 ff.). In the same spirit He bids men lend, hoping for nothing (Luk 6:35, according to the translation of best suited to the context). Another aspect of the unselfishness which is characteristic of the spirit of love Christ would instil, is the suppression of those vindictive feelings which are prone to rise when we experience ill-treatment from others. We are required to forgive those who have wronged us, not seven times, but seventy times seven (Mat 18:21 f.): to be so far from resenting injury we receive from another that we turn the other cheek to the smiter, allow him who would take away our coat to have our cloak also, and go two miles with him who would compel us to go one (Mat 5:38-42); to love our enemies, and to pray for them that persecute us (Mat 5:44). Again, this unselfishness will exhibit itself in the absence of all self-assertion or desire to attain pre-eminence among our fellows. Such self-exaltation is characteristic of the scribes and Pharisees (Mar 12:38 f., Mat 23:5 ff.), and of the Gentiles (Mar 10:42, Luk 22:25). But the follower of Christ, who came not to be ministered unto but to minister, and who was among His disciples as he that serveth, will be ready to stoop to the lowliest service (Mar 10:43-45, Luk 22:26 f.), and will seek for self-exaltation only through self-abasement (Luk 14:11).

But while love is thus regardless of self, it will ever seek to advance the good of others. It will give readily to supply their demands (Mat 5:42, Luk 6:30). Nay, it will be quick to anticipate them. It will teach us to put ourselves in their place and realize what they stand in need of. All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them (Mat 7:12, Luk 6:31). We shall not hesitate to share with them our earthly goods. It is more blessed to give than to receive is a saying of Christs preserved by St. Paul (Act 20:35) which is not recorded in the Gospels. In the picture which Christ has painted of the Judgment, He claims as offices of love performed towards Himself acts of kindness done to our unfortunate fellow-creatures (Mat 25:34-40). That is the wise use of our riches whereby we make to ourselves friends of those whom we benefit (Luk 16:9). But we shall care not only for our brothers worldly interests, but also for his spiritual welfare. We are solemnly warned to give heed lest we cause him to stumble (Mar 9:42, Luk 17:1 f.). It is not the will of our Father which is in heaven that one of these little ones, i.e. the humblest member of the Kingdom of God, should perish (Mat 18:14). And while we are careful to avoid the censorious spirit which takes delight in uncharitable judgment of the faults of others (Mat 7:1 f.), we shall still feel it our duty to rebuke our brother when he trespasses, and to endeavour to reclaim him from his sin (Mat 18:15 f.).

One other point worthy of notice in connexion with the duty of brotherly love which Christ inculcates, is the light in which this duty is presented in view of the love which we experience at the hands of God. At the root of all that Christ says regarding the love which we should display to one another lies the great truth of the Fatherhood of God. That word of St. Johns, We love because he first loved us (1Jn 4:19), expresses the position which Christ takes up. To forgive another his trespasses and to recompense an injury with kindness, to love ones enemies and to pray for them that persecute one, appears the height of magnanimity from the standpoint of the natural man. But Christ puts the matter in a new light. He reminds us of the love with which God treats man, undeserving as he is, and of the readiness with which He forgives us our offences. In the parable of the Unforgiving Servant (Mat 18:23-35) He exhibits in its true light the conduct of the man who, freely forgiven at the hands of God, yet refuses to forgive his brother who has offended him. And as our indignation burns at the behaviour of the unforgiving servant in the parable, we realize that so far from the forgiveness of those who have offended us being the magnanimous conduct we had imagined, it is a simple duty, the non-fulfilment of which calls for severest condemnation.

In the Fourth Gospel the duty of love to our brother is laid down with the utmost distinctness, though the references are comparatively few. As in the Synoptics Christ had summed up the Law and the Prophets in the Golden Rule to do unto others whatsoever we would that they should do to us, so here He concentrates His ethical teaching to His disciples in the new commandment to love one another as He has loved them (Joh 13:34; Joh 15:12). It was a new commandment in the new emphasis with which it was enjoined, in the new place assigned to it as the one principle in which the Law and the Prophets find fulfilment (Mat 7:12; Mat 5:17 ff., cf. Rom 13:9, Gal 5:14), in the new sanction it received through the appeal to Christs own example. He declares that the keeping of this commandment is the sure test whereby His disciples may be recognized by others (Joh 13:35). It is by their fulfilment of it alone that they may enjoy such close communion with Him as He enjoys with His Father (Joh 15:10; Joh 15:12). He has given them an example in His own Person of the love they are to practise. At the last meal with His disciples, at which this new commandment was given, He had Himself washed their feet, to enforce the injunction to lowly service which He laid upon them (Joh 13:14 ff.). But this act of condescension on the part of the Master was typical of the self-denying love which He had displayed throughout His whole intercourse with them, that love which reached its culminating point in the willing sacrifice of His life. It is to this that He points when He urges them to love one another as He has loved them. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends (Joh 15:13).

It has been urged that the brotherly love which is thus commended in the Fourth Gospel falls short of that enjoined in the Synoptics, in respect that it is limited to the circle of the Christian brotherhood. While Christ in the Synoptics commands us to love our neighbour, and insists that the love which He enjoins must embrace not only our friends but our enemies, we read in the Fourth Gospel of a love for one another (Joh 13:34-35; Joh 15:12; Joh 15:17). The reciprocal pronoun points to a limitation of the love to the Christian brotherhood. The Christians are known not by their love for others, but by their mutual love amongst themselves (H. Holtzmann, Handcom. on Joh 13:13, Neutest. Theol. ii. 388 f.; O. Holtzmann, Johannesevang. 76, 266). And as the love which the believer is exhorted to practise is limited to the Christian brotherhood, so also, it is maintained, is that of Christ Himself, which is held up as an example. The Fourth Gospel and St. Paul both cite the death of Christ as the highest proof that can be given of His love; but St. Paul finds in it a proof of His love for His enemies (Rom 5:6 ff.), whereas the Evangelist adduces it as a proof of His love for His friends (Joh 15:13). Such love of friends, it is maintained, is the highest love the Gospel recognizes. Of love for ones enemies it knows nothing (O. Holtzmann, ib. 87, 276; H. Holtzmann, Handcom. on Joh 15:13, Neutest. Theol. ii. 477).

We must admit that there is so much truth in the contention that, as a matter of fact, the love referred to in Joh 13:34 f., Joh 15:12; Joh 15:17 is a love of Christian brethren for one another. It would be quite unwarrantable to find the novelty of the commandment Joh 13:34 in the wideness of its scope, to which there is no reference at all in the context. But it is equally unwarrantable to explain that novelty as consisting in the narrowness of the circle within which Christ, in the context, insisted on its fulfilment, as if this commandment to practise brotherly love were an advance upon the old injunction to love ones neighbour. (So Grotius: Novum autem dicit, quia non agit de dilectione communi omnium, sed de speciali Christianorum inter se, qua tales sunt; cf. Klbing, SK [Note: K Studien und Kritiken.] , 1845, pp. 685694). It is a mistake to take the commandment in any exclusive sense, as if there were any contrast implied to the wider commandment of the Synoptics. Christ speaks of the love of Christian brethren for one another, either because He had had occasion immediately before to give His disciples a lesson on the manner in which they should be ready to render loving service to one another (Joh 13:4-17), or because it was natural to look for the display of this spirit of love He would inculcate first of all within the smaller circle of those who stood in close relation to Him and to one another. It is not a question of confining their love to their Christian brethren, but of displaying it towards those with whom they come into closest contact.

In the same way as Christ urges them to show their love to those who stand nearest to them, He represents His own love as issuing in the sacrifice He made for them, His friends. He does not mean that it was because of the love they had shown Him as friends that He responded with this culminating proof of love in return. On the contrary, He calls them friends because they are the objects of His love (Joh 15:15 f.). His sacrifice has not been evoked by the friendship they have displayed. It is rather their friendship that is the response to the love He has cherished for them, of which that sacrifice was the culminating proof.

While we recognize, then, that in this farewell conversation with His disciples, the love which Christ urges them to display is in the first instance a love of one toward another, we cannot admit that there is any intention on the part either of the Evangelist or of Christ Himself to limit the practice of it to the Christian brotherhood. The circumstances in which the address was spoken sufficiently explain the form in which the commandment is given, and the manner in which Christs example is appealed to. The Teacher who had inculcated a love which was to embrace friend and enemy alike might well feel constrained to give His own disciples the commandment to love one another. And He who had given His life as a ransom for many might well remind those who stood nearest to Him that they were among the many for whom the sacrifice was made, and appeal to them to love one another as He had loved them.

Literature.Sartorius, The Doctrine of Divine Love; Wendt, Die Lehre Jesu, ii.; NT Theol. of B. Weiss, Beyschlag, H. Holtzmann, Stevens; Ritschl, Rechtfertigung und Vershnung; Rothe, Theol. Ethik; Seeley, Ecce Homo, chs. xiii. xiv.; F. W. Robertson, Serm. iv. 222; Law, Serious Call, ch. xx.; Butler, Serm. xi.xiv.; C. A. Briggs, Ethical Teaching of Jesus, 97, 114.

G. Wauchope Stewart.

Fuente: A Dictionary Of Christ And The Gospels

Love

luv (, ‘ahebh, , ‘ahabhah, noun; , phileo, , agapao, verb; , agape, noun): Love to both God and man is fundamental to true religion, whether as expressed in the Old Testament or the New Testament. Jesus Himself declared that all the law and the prophets hang upon love (Mat 22:40; Mar 12:28-34). Paul, in his matchless ode on love (1Co 13:1-13), makes it the greatest of the graces of the Christian life – greater than speaking with tongues, or the gift of prophecy, or the possession of a faith of superior excellence; for without love all these gifts and graces, desirable and useful as they are in themselves, are as nothing, certainly of no permanent value in the sight of God. Not that either Jesus or Paul underestimates the faith from which all the graces proceed, for this grace is recognized as fundamental in all God’s dealings with man and man’s dealings with God (Joh 6:28 f; Heb 11:6); but both alike count that faith as but idle and worthless belief that does not manifest itself in love to both God and man. As love is the highest expression of God and His relation to mankind, so it must be the highest expression of man’s relation to his Maker and to his fellow-man.

I. Definition.

While the Hebrew and Greek words for love have various shades and intensities of meaning, they may be summed up in some such definition as this: Love, whether used of God or man, is an earnest and anxious desire for and an active and beneficent interest ins the well-being of the one loved. Different degrees and manifestations of this affection are recognized in the Scriptures according to the circumstances and relations of life, e.g. the expression of love as between husband and wife, parent and child, brethren according to the flesh, and according to grace; between friend and enemy, and, finally, between God and man. It must not be overlooked, however, that the fundamental idea of love as expressed in the definition of it is never absent in any one of these relations of life, even though the manifestation thereof may differ according to the circumstances and relations. Christ’s interview with the apostle Peter on the shore of the Sea of Tiberias (Joh 21:15-18) sets before us in a most beautiful way the different shades of meaning as found in the New Testament words , phileo, and , agapao. In the question of Christ, Lovest thou me more than these? the Greek verb , agapas, denotes the highest, most perfect kind of love (Latin, diligere), implying a clear determination of will and judgment, and belonging particularly to the sphere of Divine revelation. In his answer Peter substitutes the word , philo, which means the natural human affection, with its strong feeling, or sentiment, and is never used in Scripture language to designate man’s love to God. While the answer of Peter, then, claims only an inferior kind of love, as compared to the one contained in Christ’s question, he nevertheless is confident of possessing at least such love for his Lord.

II. The Love of God.

First in the consideration of the subject of love comes the love of God – He who is love, and from whom all love is derived. The love of God is that part of His nature – indeed His whole nature, for God is love – which leads Him to express Himself in terms of endearment toward His creatures, and actively to manifest that interest and affection in acts of loving care and self-sacrifice in behalf of the objects of His love. God is love (1Jo 4:8, 1Jo 4:16) just as truly as He is light (1Jo 1:5), truth (1Jo 1:6), and spirit (Joh 4:24). Spirit and light are expressions of His essential nature; love is the expression of His personality corresponding to His nature. God not merely loves, but is love; it is His very nature, and He imparts this nature to be the sphere in which His children dwell, for he that abideth in love abideth in God, and God abideth in him (1Jo 4:16). Christianity is the only religion that sets forth the Supreme Being as Love. In heathen religions He is set forth as an angry being and in constant need of appeasing.

1. Objects of God’s Love:

The object of God’s love is first and foremost His own Son, Jesus Christ (Mat 3:17; Mat 17:5; Luk 20:13; Joh 17:24). The Son shares the love of the Father in a unique sense; He is my chosen, in whom my soul delighteth (Isa 42:1). There exists an eternal affection between the Son and the Father – the Son is the original and eternal object of the Father’s love (Joh 17:24). If God’s love is eternal it must have an eternal object, hence, Christ is an eternal being.

God loves the believer in His Son with a special love. Those who are united by faith and love to Jesus Christ are, in a different sense from those who are not thus united, the special objects of God’s love. Said Jesus, thou lovedst them, even as thou lovedst me (Joh 17:23). Christ is referring to the fact that, just as the disciples had received the same treatment from the world that He had received, so they had received of the Father the same love that He Himself had received. They were not on the outskirts of God’s love, but in the very center of it. For the father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me (Joh 16:27). Here phileo is used for love, indicating the fatherly affection of God for the believer in Christ, His Son. This is love in a more intense form than that spoken of for the world (Joh 3:16).

God loves the world (Joh 3:16; compare 1Ti 2:4; 2Pe 3:9). This is a wonderful truth when we realize what a world this is – a world of sin and corruption. This was a startling truth for Nicodemus to learn, who conceived of God as loving only the Jewish nation. To him, in his narrow exclusiveism, the announcement of the fact that God loved the whole world of men was startling. God loves the world of sinners lost and ruined by the fall. Yet it is this world, weak, ungodly, without strength, sinners (Rom 5:6-8), dead in trespasses and sins (Eph 2:1 the King James Version), and unrighteous, that God so loved that He gave His only begotten Son in order to redeem it. The genesis of man’s salvation lies in the love and mercy of God (Eph 2:4 f). But love is more than mercy or compassion; it is active and identifies itself with its object. The love of the heavenly Father over the return of His wandering children is beautifully set forth in the parable of the Prodigal Son (Lk 15). Nor should the fact be overlooked that God loves not only the whole world, but each individual in it; it is a special as well as a general love (Joh 3:16, whosoever; Gal 2:20, loved me, and gave himself up for me).

2. Manifestations of God’s Love:

God’s love is manifested by providing for the physical, mental, moral and spiritual needs of His people (Isa 48:14, Isa 48:20, Isa 48:21; Isa 62:9-12; Isa 63:3, Isa 63:12). In these Scriptures God is seen manifesting His power in behalf His people in the time of their wilderness journeying and their captivity. He led them, fed and clothed them, guided them and protected them from all their enemies. His love was again shown in feeling with His people, their sorrows and afflictions (Isa 63:9); He suffered in their affliction, their interests were His; He was not their adversary but their friend, even though it might have seemed to them as if He either had brought on them their suffering or did not care about it. Nor did He ever forget them for a moment during all their trials. They thought He did; they said, God hath forgotten us, He hath forgotten to be gracious; but no; a mother might forget her child that she should not have compassion on it, but God would never forget His people. How could He? Had He not graven them upon the palms of His hands (Isa 49:15 f)? Rather than His love being absent in the chastisement of His people, the chastisement itself was often a proof of the presence of the Divine love, for whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth (Heb 12:6-11). Loving reproof and chastisement are necessary oftentimes for growth in holiness and righteousness. Our redemption from sin is to be attributed to God’s wondrous love; Thou hast in love to my soul delivered it from the pit of corruption; for thou hast cast all my sins behind thy back (Isa 38:17; compare Psa 50:21; Psa 90:8). Eph 2:4 f sets forth in a wonderful way how our entire salvation springs forth from _ the mercy and love of God; But God, being rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, even when we were dead through our trespasses, made us alive together with Christ, etc. It is because of the love of the Father that we are granted a place in the heavenly kingdom (Eph 2:6-8). But the supreme manifestation of the love of God, as set forth in the Scripture, is that expressed in the gift of His only-begotten Son to die for the sins of the world (Joh 3:16; Rom 5:6-8; 1Jo 4:9 f), and through whom the sinful and sinning but repentant sons of men are taken into the family of God, and receive the adoption of sons (1Jo 3:1 f; Gal 4:4-6). From this wonderful love of God in Christ Jesus nothing in heaven or earth or hell, created or uncreated or to be created, shall be able to separate us (Rom 8:37 f).

III. The Love of Man.

1. Source of Man’s Love:

Whatever love there is in man, whether it be toward God or toward his fellowman, has its source in God – Love is of God; and every one that loveth is begotten of God, and knoweth God. He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love (1Jo 4:7 f); We love, because he first loved us (1Jo 4:19). Trench, in speaking of agape, says it is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion. Heathen writers do not use it at all, their nearest approach to it being philanthropa or philadelphia – the love betweeen those of the same blood. Love in the heart of man is the offspring of the love of God. Only the regenerated heart can truly love as God loves; to this higher form of love the unregenerate can lay no claim (1Jo 4:7, 1Jo 4:19, 1Jo 4:21; 1Jo 2:7-11; 1Jo 3:10; 1Jo 4:11 f). The regenerate man is able to see his fellow-man as God sees him, value him as God values him, not so much because of what he is by reason of his sin and unloveliness, but because of what, through Christ, he may become; he sees man’s intrinsic worth and possibility in Christ (2Co 5:14-17). This love is also created in the heart of man by the Holy Ghost (Rom 5:5), and is a fruit of the Spirit (Gal 5:22). It is also stimulated by the example of the Lord Jesus Christ, who, more than anyone else, manifested to the world the spirit and nature of true love (Joh 13:34; Joh 15:12; Gal 2:20; Eph 5:25-27; 1Jo 4:9 f).

2. Objects of Man’s Love:

God must be the first and supreme object of man’s love; He must be loved with all the heart, mind, soul and strength (Mat 22:37 f; Mar 12:29-34). In this last passage the exhortation to supreme love to God is connected with the doctrine of the unity of God (Deu 6:4 f) – inasmuch as the Divine Being is one and indivisible, so must our love to Him be undivided. Our love to God is shown in the keeping of His commandments (Exo 20:6; 1Jo 5:3; 2Jo 1:6). Love is here set forth as more than a mere affection or sentiment; it is something that manifests itself, not only in obedience to known Divine commands, but also in a protecting and defense of them, and a seeking to know more and more of the will of God in order to express love for God in further obedience (compare Deu 10:12). Those who love God will hate evil and all forms of worldliness, as expressed in the avoidance of the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life (Psa 97:10; 1Jo 2:15-17). Whatever there may be in his surroundings that would draw the soul away from God and righteousness, that the child of God will avoid. Christ, being God, also claims the first place in our affections. He is to be chosen before father or mother, parent, or child, brother or sister, or friend (Mat 10:35-38; Luk 14:26). The word hate in these passages does not mean to hate in the sense in which we use the word today. It is used in the sense in which Jacob is said to have hated Leah (Gen 29:31), that is, he loved her less than Rachel; He loved also Rachel more than Leah (Gen 29:30). To love Christ supremely is the test of true discipleship (Luk 14:26), and is an unfailing mark of the elect (1Pe 1:8). We prove that we are really God’s children by thus loving His Son (Joh 8:42). Absence of such love means, finally, eternal separation (1Co 16:22).

Man must love his fellow-man also. Love for the brotherhood is a natural consequence of the love of the fatherhood; for In this the children of God are manifest, and the children of the devil: whosoever doeth not righteousness is not of God, neither he that loveth not his brother (1Jo 3:10). For a man to say I love God and yet hate his fellowman is to brand himself as a liar (1Jo 4:20); He that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, cannot love God whom he hath not seen (1Jo 4:20); he that loveth God will love his brother also (1Jo 4:21). The degree in which we are to love our fellow-man is as thyself (Mat 22:39), according to the strict observance of law. Christ set before His followers a much higher example than that, however. According to the teaching of Jesus we are to supersede this standard: A new commandment I give unto you, that ye love one another; even as I have loved you, that ye also love one another (Joh 13:34). The exhibition of love of this character toward our fellow-man is the badge of true discipleship. It may be called the sum total of our duty toward our fellow-man, for Love worketh no ill to his neighbor: love therefore is the fulfillment of the law; for he that loveth his neighbor hath fulfilled the law (Rom 13:8, Rom 13:10). The qualities which should characterize the love which we are to manifest toward our fellow-men are beautifully set forth in 1Co 13:1-13. It is patient and without envy; it is not proud or self-elated, neither does it behave discourteously; it does not cherish evil, but keeps good account of the good; it rejoices not at the downfall of an enemy or competitor, but gladly hails his success; it is hopeful, trustful and forbearing – for such there is no law, for they need none; they have fulfilled the law.

Nor should it be overlooked that our Lord commanded His children to love their enemies, those who spoke evil of them, and despitefully used them (Mat 5:43-48). They were not to render evil for evil, but contrariwise, blessing. The love of the disciple of Christ must manifest itself in supplying the necessities, not of our friends only (1Jo 3:16-18), but also of our enemies (Rom 12:20 f).

Our love should be without hypocrisy (Rom 12:9); there should be no pretense about it; it should not be a thing of mere word or tongue, but a real experience manifesting itself in deed and truth (1Jo 3:18). True love will find its expression in service to man: Through love be servants one to another (Gal 5:13). What more wonderful illustration can be found of ministering love than that set forth by our Lord in the ministry of foot-washing as found in Jn 13? Love bears the infirmities of the weak, does not please itself, but seeks the welfare of others (Rom 15:1-3; Phi 2:21; Gal 6:2; 1Co 10:24); it surrenders things which may be innocent in themselves but which nevertheless may become a stumbling-block to others (Rom 14:15, Rom 14:21); it gladly forgives injuries (Eph 4:32), and gives the place of honor to another (Rom 12:10). What, then, is more vital than to possess such love? It is the fulfillment of the royal law (Jam 2:8), and is to be put above everything else (Col 3:14); it is the binder that holds all the other graces of the Christian life in place (Col 3:14); by the possession of such love we know that we have passed from death unto life (1Jo 3:14), and it is the supreme test of our abiding in God and God in us (1Jo 4:12, 1Jo 4:16).

Fuente: International Standard Bible Encyclopedia

Love

Of children for parents

Children

Of God

God, Love of

Of man for God

Exo 20:6; Deu 5:10; Deu 6:5; Deu 7:9; Deu 10:12; Deu 11:1; Deu 13:3; Deu 30:6; Deu 30:16; Deu 30:20; Jos 22:5; Deu 11:13; Deu 11:22; Jos 23:11; Psa 18:1; Psa 31:23; Psa 37:4; Psa 45:10-11; Psa 63:5-6; Psa 69:35-36; Psa 73:25-26; Psa 91:14; Psa 97:10; Psa 116:1; Psa 145:20; Pro 8:17; Pro 23:26; Isa 56:6-7; Jer 2:2-3; Mar 12:29-30; Mar 12:32-33; Mat 22:37-38; Luk 11:42; Joh 5:42; Rom 5:5; Rom 8:28; 1Co 8:3; Phi 1:9; 2Th 3:5; 2Ti 1:7; 1Jn 2:5; 1Jn 2:15; 1Jn 3:17-18; 1Jn 4:12; 1Jn 4:16-21; 1Jn 5:1-3; 2Jn 1:6; Jud 1:21

Of man for Jesus

– General references

Mat 10:37-38; Mat 25:34-40; Mat 27:55-61; Mar 9:41; Luk 2:29-30; Luk 7:47; Joh 8:42; Joh 14:15; Joh 14:21; Joh 14:23; Joh 14:28; Joh 15:9; Joh 16:27; Joh 17:26; Joh 21:17; Act 21:13; 1Co 16:22; 2Co 5:8; 2Co 5:6; 2Co 5:14-15; Gal 5:6; Gal 5:22; Gal 6:14; Eph 3:17-19; Eph 4:15; Eph 6:24; Phi 1:9; Phi 1:23; Phi 1:20-21; Phi 3:7-8; Col 1:8; 2Th 3:5; 2Ti 1:13; 2Ti 4:8; Phm 1:5; Heb 6:10; Jas 1:12; Jas 2:5; 1Pe 1:8; 1Pe 2:7; Rev 2:4

– Instances of love for Jesus:

b Mary

Mat 26:6-13; Joh 12:3-8; Luk 10:39

b Peter

Mat 17:4; Joh 13:37; Joh 18:10; Joh 20:3-6; Joh 21:7

b Thomas

Joh 11:16

b The disciples

Mar 16:10; Luk 24:17-41; Joh 20:20

b Mary Magdalene and other disciples

Mat 27:55-56; Mat 27:61; Mat 28:1-9; Luk 8:2-3; Luk 23:27; Luk 23:55-56; Luk 24:1-10; Joh 20:1-2; Joh 20:11-18

b A man of Gadara out of whom Jesus cast an evil spirit

Mar 5:18

b Joseph of Arimathaea

Mat 27:57-60

b Nicodemus

Joh 19:39-40

b Women of Jerusalem

Luk 23:27

Of man for man

– General references

Lev 19:18; Lev 19:34; Deu 10:19; Psa 133:1-3; Pro 10:12; Pro 15:17; Pro 17:9; Pro 17:17; Son 8:6-7; Mat 5:41-47; Mat 10:41-42; Mat 19:19; Gal 5:14; Mat 25:34-40; Mar 9:41; Mar 12:30-33; Luk 6:31-35; Mat 7:12; Luk 10:30-37; Joh 13:14-15; Joh 13:34-35; Joh 15:12-13; Joh 15:17; Rom 12:9-10; Rom 13:8-10; 1Co 8:1; 1Co 13:1-13; 1Co 14:1; 1Co 16:14; 2Co 8:7-8; Gal 5:13; Gal 5:22; Gal 5:26; Eph 5:2; Phi 1:9; Phi 2:2; Col 2:2; Col 3:12-14; 1Th 1:3; 1Th 3:12; 1Th 4:9; 1Ti 1:5; 1Ti 1:14; 1Ti 2:15; 1Ti 4:12; 1Ti 6:2; 1Ti 6:11; 2Ti 2:22; Tit 3:15; Phm 1:12; Phm 1:16; Heb 10:24; Jas 2:8; 1Pe 1:22; 1Pe 2:17; 1Pe 3:8-9; 1Pe 4:8; 2Pe 1:7; 1Jn 2:9-11; 1Jn 3:11; 1Jn 3:14; 1Jn 3:16-19; 1Jn 3:23; 1Jn 4:7; 1Jn 4:11-12; 1Jn 4:20-21; 1Jn 5:1-2; 2Jn 1:5

– Exemplification of the love of man for man

b General references

Exo 32:31-32; Psa 133:1-3; Pro 24:17-18; Mat 5:41-42; Mat 10:41-42; Mat 25:34-40; Mar 9:41; Luk 10:25-37; Act 20:26-27; Act 20:31; Act 26:29; Rom 1:12; Rom 5:7; Rom 9:1-3; Rom 12:15-16; Rom 14:19; Rom 14:21; Rom 15:1-2; Rom 15:5; Rom 15:7; Rom 15:14-15; Rom 15:24; Rom 15:32; Rom 16:1-16; Rom 16:19; Col 4:7; 1Co 1:4; 1Co 4:14-16; 1Co 8:13; 1Co 10:24; 2Co 1:3-6; 2Co 1:14; 2Co 1:23-24; 2Co 2:1-17; 2Co 3:2; 2Co 4:5; 2Co 6:4-6; 2Co 6:11-13; 2Co 7:1-4; 2Co 7:7; 2Co 7:12; 2Co 11:2; 2Co 12:14-16; 2Co 12:19-21; 2Co 13:9; Gal 4:11-20; Gal 6:1-2; Gal 6:10; Eph 3:13; Eph 4:2; Eph 4:32; Eph 6:22; Eph 6:24; Phi 1:3-5; Phi 1:7-8; Phi 1:23-26; Phi 2:19; Phi 3:18; Phi 4:1; Col 1:3-4; Col 1:24; Col 1:28-29; Col 2:1; Col 2:5; 1Th 1:3-4; 1Th 2:7-8; 1Th 2:11-12; 1Th 2:17-20; 1Th 3:5; 1Th 3:7-10; 1Th 3:12; 1Th 5:8; 1Th 5:11; 1Th 5:14; 2Th 1:4; 1Ti 1:5; 1Ti 5:9-10; 1Ti 6:2; 1Ti 6:11; 2Ti 1:3-4; 2Ti 3:8; 2Ti 2:10; Phm 1:8-9; Phm 1:12; Phm 1:16-21; Heb 5:2; Heb 6:9-10; Heb 13:1-3; Heb 13:22; Jas 1:27 Fraternity

– Instances of:

b Abraham for Lot

Gen 14:14-16

b Naomi, Ruth, and Boaz

Rth 1

b David’s subjects

2Sa 15:30; 2Sa 17:27-29

b Obadiah for the prophets

1Ki 18:4

b Jehoshabeath for Joash

2Ch 22:11

b Nehemiah for Israelites

Neh 5:10-15

b Mordecai for Esther

Est 2:7

b Job’s friends

Job 42:11

b Centurion for his servant

Luk 7:2-6

b Roman Christians for Paul

Act 28:15

Of money:

– The root of evil

1Ti 6:10 Riches

Of parents for children

Parents; Brother; Fraternity; Friendship

Fuente: Nave’s Topical Bible

Love

Love Feasts, Agap. Jud 1:12; 2Pe 2:13. A meeting accompanying the Lord’s Supper in which the poorer members of the church were provided for by the contributions of Christians, but whether before or after the celebration is uncertain. Chrysostom says that after the early community of goods had ceased, the richer members brought to the church contributions of food and drink, of which, after the conclusion of the services and the celebration of the Lord’s Supper, all partook together, by this means helping to promote the principle of love among Christians. The love feasts were forbidden to be held in churches by the Council of Laodicea, a.d. 320; but in some form or other they have been continued in some churches.

Fuente: People’s Dictionary of the Bible

Love

(in Max Scheler) Giving one’s self to a “total being” (Gesamtwesen); it therefore discloses the essence of that being; for this reason love is, for Scheler, an aspect of phenomonelogical knowledge. — P. A. S.

Fuente: The Dictionary of Philosophy

Love

agapao (G25) Love

phileo (G5368)

Although no attempt has been made in our Authorized Version to discriminate between agapao and phileo, the frequently noteworthy difference between them should have been reproduced. Because this difference is nearly equivalent to the one between the Latin diligo (esteem) and amo (love), understanding the exact distinction between these Latin verbs will help us understand the difference between the two Greek verbs.

Cicero frequently opposed diligo and amo in an instructive manner. In a letter about his affection for another friend he said: “In order that you might know that he is not only esteemed [diligi] by me but also loved [amari]” From these and similar passages we might conclude that amare corresponds to philein (G5368) and is stronger than diligere, which corresponds to agapan. This is true, but it is not the whole truth. Ernesti correctly noted the different meanings of the Latin verbs: “To esteem[diligere] pertains more to judgment; to love [amare], however, extends to the innermost feeling of the soul.” Cicero (in the passage first quoted) really was saying: “I do not esteemthe man merely, but I lovehim; there is something of the passionate warmth of affection in the feeling with which I regard him.”

Although a friend may desire “to be loved” rather than “to be esteemed” by his friend, “being esteemed” is more than “being loved”; the agapasthai is more than the phileisthai. The first term expresses an intellectual attachment of choice and selection (“diligere” = “deligere” = “to choose”). Esteem may spring from a sense of obligation (as in the case of a benefactor) or a regard for worthy qualities in an object or person. The second term refers to a relation that is more emotional and that implies more passion, though it is not necessarily an unreasoning attachment.

There are two passages in Xenophon that illuminate the relation between agapao and phileo. These passages show how the notions of respect and reverence are always implied in agapan, though not in philein (though philein does not exclude them). In the second passage Xenophon stated: “The women were loving [ephiloun] him as one who cares; he was esteeming [egapa] them as beneficial.” This helps to explain why people are commanded agapan ton Theon (G2316) and good men do; but people are never commanded philein ton Theon. The Father, however, does both in relation to his Son.

Unlike the Authorized Version, by using diligo (esteem) and amo (love), the Vulgate has preserved a distinction between agapao and phileo in almost all of the New Testament passages. It is especially unfortunate that the Authorized Version did not preserve the important and instructive distinction between agapao and phileo in Joh 21:15-17. In this passage Christ asked Peter three times: “Do you love Me?” Christ’s first question, “Agapas me?,” seems a cold way for him to address the penitent Peter, who was overflowing with love for his Lord, since it fails to express the warmth of Peter’s affection toward him. Although any form of the question would have been painful (Joh 21:17), the use of agapas was even more distressing. In his answers, Peter twice substituted philo se (Joh 21:15) the more personal word for lovefor Christ’s agapas. Christ’s third formulation of the question, which uses phileis not agapas, shows that Peter has triumphed. But all of this subtle play of feeling disappears in a translation that either does not care or that is not able to reproduce the original variation of words.

Eros, eran, and erastes never occur in the New Testament, though eran and erastes occasionally occur in the Septuagint. Their absence, which is Love significant, is partially explained by the way that the world had corrupted their meanings. These words had become so associated with the idea of sensual passion and carried such an aura of unholiness about them that they were not used in Scripture. Rather than employing one of them, the writers of Scripture created the new word agape (G26), which occurs in the Septuagint and in the Apocrypha but not in any heathen writings.

But there may have been a more important reason to avoid using eros, which, like other words, could have received a new consecration despite the degradation of its past history. And, indeed, there were tendencies among Platonists to use eros to refer to the longing after unseen but eternal Beauty, whose faint vestiges appear everywhere. In this sense Philo called eros “heavenly love.” Because eros expressed this yearning desire and longing after the unpossessed, it was unsuitable to express Christian love. Christian love is not merely a sense of need, emptiness, and poverty and a longing after fullness and an unattainable Beauty. Christian love is a love to God and to man that is the result of God’s love shed abroad in the hearts of his people. Since the incarnation, mere longing and yearning (eros at its best) have given place to a love that not merely desires but that also possesses the one loved.

Fuente: Synonyms of the New Testament