G5368 φιλέω (philéō)

φιλέω, -ὦ ; impf. 3 pers. sing. ἐφίλει ; 1 aor. ἐφίλησα; pf. πεφίληκα; (φίλος); fr. Hom. down; 1. ἰο love; to be friendly to one, (Sept. several times for 398) : τινά, Mt. x. 37; Jn. v. 20 [here L mrg. ἀγαπᾷ]; xi. 8, 36; xv. 19; xvi. 27; xx. 2; xxi. 15-17; 1 Co. xvi. 22; Rev. iii. 19; with ἐν πίστει added, with a love founded in and springing from faith, Tit. iii.15; τί, to love i. e. delight in, long for, a thing: τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν, Mt. xxiii. 6; ἀσπασμούς, Lk. xx. 46; τὴν ψυχήν, to be desirous of preserving one’s life (opp. to μισεῖν, to hate it when it cannot be kept without denying Christ), Jn. xii. 25; with nouns denoting virtues or vices: τὸ yevdos, Rey. xxii. 15 (σοφίαν, Prov. xxix. 3; viii.17); foll. by an inf., like the Lat. amo facere, to love to do, i. 8. to do with pleasure: Mt. vi. 5 (Is. lvi. 10; Pind. Nem. 1,15; Aeschyl. septem 619; Agam. 763; Suppl. 769; Eur. Iph. Taur. 1198; Rhes. 394; Xen. hipparch. 7, 9; Ael. ν. ἢ. 14, 37). 2. to kiss: τινά, Mt. xxvi. 48; Mk. xiv. 44; Lk. xxii. ἀν, (often in the Grk. writ.; Sept. for pw, Gen. xxvii. 26 sq-, and often). 3. As to the distinction between ἀγαπᾶν and φιλεῖν : the former, by virtue of its connection with ἄγαμαι, properly denotes a love founded in admiration, veneration, esteem, like the Lat. diligere, to be kindly disposed to one, wish one well; but φιλεῖν denotes an inclination prompted by sense and emotion, Lat. amare ; 6 μή του δεόμενος οὐδέ τι ἀγαπῴη ἄν - ὁ δὲ μὴ ἀγαπῴη [-πῶν ()}, οὐδ᾽ ἂν φιλοῖ, Plat. Lys. p. 215b.; ἐφιλήσατε αὐτὸν (Julius Caesar) ὡς πατέρα καὶ ἠγαπήσατε ὡς εὐεργέτην, Dio Cass. 44, 48; ut scires, eum a me non diligi solum, verum etiam amari, Cic. ad fam. 13, 47; L. Clodius valde me diligit vel, ut ἐμφατικώτερον dicam, valde me amat, id. ad Brut. 1. Hence men are said ἀγαπᾶν God, not φιλεῖν ; and God is said ἀγαπῆσαι τὸν κόσμον (Jn. iii. 16), and φιλεῖν the disciples of Christ (Jn. xvi. 27); Christ bids us ἀγαπᾶν (not φιλεῖν) τοὺς ἐχθρούς (Mt. v. 44), because love as an emotion cannot be commanded, but only love as a choice. Wis dom says, τοὺς ἐμὲ φιλοῦντας ἀγαπῶ, Prov. viii. 17. As a further aid in judging of the difference between the two words compare the foll. pass.: Jn. xi. 3, 5, 36; xxi. 15-17; [even in some cases where they might appear to be used interchangeably (e.g. Jn. xiv. 23; xvi. 27) the difference can still be traced]. From what has been said, it is evident that ἀγαπᾶν is not, and cannot be, used of sexual love [but it is so used occasionally by the later writers; cf. Plut. Pericl. 24,12 p. 165e.; symp. 7 p. 180 Ὁ. ὁ ἐρώμενος τὸν ἐραστὴν ἀγαπᾶ ; of. Steph. Thesaur. i. p. 209 a.; Soph. Lex. 5. v. ἀγαπάω, 2; Woolsey in the Andover Rev. for Aug. 1885, p.170sq.]. Cf. Tittmann, Syn. N. T. i. p.50 sqq.; Cremer s. v. ἀγαπάω [416 Aufl. p. 9 sq.]; Trench § xii.; [Schmidt ch. 136, esp. §6; Cope, Aristot. rhet. vol. i. App. A. (also given in the Journ. of Philol. for 1868, Ρ. 88 sqq.) ; also Héhkne in (Luthardt’s) Zeitschr. f. kirchl. Wissensch. u. s. w. for 1882, p. 6 sqq.; esp. Woolsey ἃ. 8... COMP.: καταpréa.]

φιλέω phileō 25x

pr. to manifest some act or token of kindness or affection; to kiss, Mt. 26:48; Mk. 14:44; Lk. 22:47; to love, regard with affection, have affection for, Mt. 10:37; Jn. 5:20; to like, be fond of, delight in a thing, Mt. 23:6; Rev. 22:15; to cherish inordinately, set store by, Jn. 12:25

φιλέω, -ῶ

(< φίλος), [in LXX: Ge 27:4, 9, al. (אהב), ib. 27, al. (נשׁק), La 1:2 (רֵעַ) Wi 8:2, al. ;]

to love (with the love of emotion and friendship, Lat, amare; v. SYN.): c. acc. pers., Mt 10:37, Jo 5:20; Jo 11:3, 36 15:19 16:27 20:2 21:15-17, I Co 16:22, Re 3:19; ἐν πίστει, Tit 3:15; c. acc. rei, Mt 23:6, Lk 20:46, Jo 12:25, Re 22:15; c. inf. (Is 56:10; cf. Bl., § 69, 4), Mt 6:5.

to kiss: c. acc. pers., Mt 26:48, Mk 14:44, Lk 22:47 (cf. κατα-φιλέω).†

SYN.: ἀγαπάω ω (q.v.), the love of duty and respect

We have made no attempt to discriminate between these words in our English Version. And yet there is often a difference between them, well worthy to have been noted and reproduced, if this had lain within the compass of our language; being very nearly equivalent to that between ‘diligo’ and ‘amo’ in the Latin. To understand the exact distinction between these, will help us to understand that between those other which are the more immediate object of our inquiry. For this we possess abundant material in Cicero, who often sets the words in instructive antithesis to one another. Thus, writing to one friend of the affection in which he holds another (Hp. Fam. xiii. 47) : *Ut scires illum a-me non diligt solum, verum etiam amart;? and again (Ad Brut. 1): ‘L. Clodius valde me diligit, vel, ut ἐμφατικώτερον dicam, valde me amat.’? From these and other like passages (there is an ample collection of them in Déderlein’s Latein. Synon. vol. iv. pp. 98 seq.), we might conclude that ‘ amare,’ which answers to φιλεῖν, is stronger than ‘ diligere,’ which, as we shall see, corresponds to ἀγαπᾶν. This is true, but not all the truth. Ernesti has successfully seized the law of their several uses, when he says: ‘ Diligere magis ad judicium, amare vero ad intimum aniii sensum pertinet.’ So that, in fact, Cicero in the passage first quoted is saying,—‘I do not esteem the man merely, but I love him; there is something of the passionate warmth of affection in the feeling with which I regard him.’ It will follow, that while a friend may desire rather ‘amari’ than ‘diligi’ by his friend, there are aspects in which the ‘diligi’ is more than the ‘amari,’ the ayardoOa: than the φιλεῖσθαι. The first expresses a more reasoning attachment, of choice and _ selection (‘ diligere ’=‘ deligere’), from a seeing in the object upon 42. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § ΧΙ. whom it is bestowed that which is worthy of regard; or else from a sense that such is due toward the person so regarded, as being a benefactor, or the like; while the second, without being necessarily an unreasoning attachment, does yet give less account of itself to itself; is more instinctive, is more of the feelings or natural affections, implies more passion; thus Antonius, in the funeral discourse addressed to the Roman people over the body of Cesar: ἐφιλήσατε αὐτὸν ws πατέρα, καὶ ἠγαπήσατε ὡς εὐεργέτην (Dion Cassius, xliv. 48). And see in Xenophon (Mem. ii. 7. 9, 12) two passages throwing much light on the relation between the words, and showing how the notions of respect and reverence are continually implied in the ἀγαπᾶν, which, though not excluded by, are still not involved in, the φιλεῖν. Thus in the second of these, ai μὲν ὡς κηδεμόνα ἐφίλουν, ὁ δὲ ὡς ὠφελίμους ἠγάπα. Out of this it may be explained, that while men are continually bidden ἀγαπᾶν τὸν Θεόν (Matt. xxii. 37; Luke x. 27; 1 Cor. viii. 3), and good men declared so to do (Rom. viii. 28 ; 1 Pet. i.8; 1 Johniv. 21), the φιλεῖν τὸν Θεόν is commanded to them never. The Father, indeed, both ἀγαπᾷ τὸν Tidv (John iii. 35), and also φιλεῖ τὸν Tidv (John v. 20); with the first of which statements such passages as Matt. iii. 17, with the second such as John i. 18; Prov. viii. 22, 30, may be brought into connexion. In almost all these passages of the N. T., the Vulgate, by the help of ‘diligo’ and ‘amo,’ has preserved a distinction which we have let go. This is especially to be regrétted at John xxi. 15-17; for the passing there of the original from one word to the other is singularly instructive, and should by no means escape us unnoticed. In that threefold “ Lovest thou Me? ” which the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, ἀγαπᾷς we; At this moment, when all the pulses in the heart of the now penitent Apostle are beating with a passionate affection toward §xu. SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 43 his Lord, this word on that Lord’s lips sounds far too cold ; to very imperfectly express the warmth of his affection toward Him. The question in any form would have been grievous enough (ver. 17); the language in which it is clothed makes it more grievous still.! He therefore in his answer substitutes for the ἀγαπᾷς of Christ the word of a more personal love, φιλῶ σε (ver. 15). And this he does not on the first occasion only, but again upon a second. And now at length he has triumphed; for when his Lord puts the question to him a third time, it is not ἀγαπᾷς any more, but φιλεῖς. All this subtle and delicate play of feeling disappears perforce, in a translation which either does not care, or is not able, to reproduce the variation in the words as it exists in the original. I observe in conclusion that ἔρως, ἐρᾶν, ἐραστής, never occur in the N. T., but the two latter occasionally in the Septuagint ; thus ἐρᾶν, Esth. ii. 17; Prov. iv. 6; ἐραστής generally in a dishonorable sense as ‘ paramour’ (Ezek. xvi. 33; Hos. ii. 5); yet once or twice (as Wisd. viii. 2) more honorably, not as =‘ amasius,’ but ‘amator.’ Their absence is significant. It is in part no doubt to be explained from the fact that, by the corrupt use of the world, they had become so steeped in sensual passion, carried such an atmosphere of unholiness about them (see Origen, Prol. in Cant. Opp. tom. 111. pp. 28-30), that the truth of God abstained from the defiling contact with them; yea, devised a new word rather than betake itself to one of these. For it should not be forgotten that ἀγάπη is a word born within the bosom of revealed religion: it occurs in the Septuagint (2 Sam. xiii. 15; Cant. ii. 4; Jer. ii. 2), and in the Apocrypha (Wisd. iii. 9); but there is no trace of it in any heathen writer whatever, and as little in Philo 1 Bengel generally has the honour ‘rem acu tetigisse ;’ here he has singularly missed the point, and is wholly astray: ‘dyanay, amare, est necessitudinis et affectiis ; φιλεῖν, diligere, judicii.’ 44 SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. § xu. or Josephus; the utmost they attain to here is φιλανθρωπία and φιλαδελιφία, and the last never in any sense but as the love between brethren in blood (cf. Cremer, Wérterbuch d. N. T. Gracitdt, p.12). But the reason may lie deeper still. “Epos might have fared as so many other words have fared, might have been consecrated anew, despite of the deep degradation of its past history;' and there were tendencies already working for this in the Platonist use of it, namely, as the longing and yearning desire after that unseen but eternal Beauty, the faint vestiges of which may here be everywhere traced ;? οὐράνιος ἔρως, Philo in this sense has called it (De Vit. Cont. 2; De Vit. Mos. iii. 1). But in the very fact that ἔρως (=o δεινὸς ἵμερος, Sophocles, Trach. 476), did express this yearning desire (Euripides, Ion, 67; Alcestis, 1101); this longing after the unpossessed (in Plato’s exquisite mythus, Symp. 203 ὃ, "Ἔρως is the offspring of Πενία), lay its deeper unfitness to set forth that Christian love, which is not merely the sense of need, of emptiness, of poverty, with the longing after fulness, not the yearning after an unattained and in this world unattainable Beauty ; but a love to God and to man, which is the consequence of God’s love already shed abroad in the hearts of his people. The mere longing and yearning, and ἔρως at the best is no more, has given place, since the Incarnation, to the love which is not in desire only, but also in possession. That ἔρως is no more is well 1 On the attempt which some Christian writers had made to distinguish between ‘ amor’ and ‘ dilectio’ or ‘ caritas, see Augustine, De Civ. Det, xiv. 7: ‘ Nonnulli arbitrantur aliud esse dilectionem sive caritatem, aliud amorem. Dicunt enim dilectionem accipiendam esse in bono, amorem in malo.’ He shows, by many examples of ‘ dilectio’ and ‘diligo’ used in an ill sense in the Latin Scriptures, of ‘amor’ and ‘ amo’ in a good, the impossibility of maintaining any such distinction. . 2 I cannot regard as an evidence of such reconsecration the wellknown words of Ignatius, dd Rom. 7: 6 ἐμὸς ἔρως ἐσταύρωται. It is far more consistent with the genius of these Ignatian Epistles to take ἔρως subjectively here, ‘My love of the world is crucified,’ te. with Christ ; rather than objectively, ‘ Christ, the object of my love, is crucified.’ expressed in the lines of Gregory Nazianzene (Carm. ii. 34, 150, 151): Πόθος δ᾽ ὄρεξις ἢ κωλῶν ἢ μὴ καλῶν, Ἔρως δὲ θερμὸς δυοσκαθεκτός τε πόθος." § ΧΙ, θάλασσα, πέλαγος.

φιλέω, “love”: P Tebt II. 408° (A.D. 3) ἐπιστάμενος πῶς σε τίθεμαι Ke φιλῶ, ‘since you know how I esteem and love you” (Edd.), BGU II. 531% 19 (A.p. 70-80) α[ἰ]σθόμενος πῶς pe φιλεῖς, P Tebt 11. 29424 (A.p. 146) ἵνα καὶ at ὀφίλ[ο]υσαι ἱερουργίαι τῶν σε φιλούντων θεῶν ἐπιτελῶνται, ‘*in order that the due services of the gods who love you may be performed ’’ (Edd.), P Oxy III. 5288 (ii/aA.D.) τὸ προσκύνημά σου Tua (1. ποιῶ) Tapa τῇ σε φιλούσῃ Θοήρι, ΚΕῚ perform the act of veneration on your behalf to Thoeris who loves you” (Edd.). We may add the ili/A.p. love-spell Preisigke 4047}: opkitw oe, vexvSaipov, . . . διακόνησόν μοι εἰς ᾿Απλωνοῦν, ἣν ἔτεκεν ᾿Αρσινόη. . . ἵνα pe φιλῇ καὶ ὃ ἐὰν αὐτὴν αἰτῶ, ἐπήκοός μοι ἡ {{(ν))}. The verb is followed by an inf., as in Mt 6°, in P Giss I. 8428 (ii/a.p. ad init.) φι]λοῦσι νῦν οὗτοι τὴν ἀλήθ[ε]ιαν εἰπεῖν, Chrest. II.%t 14 (ii/A.p.) τοῦτο δὲ ἐπὶ πολλῶν φιλεῖν γενέσϑαι. With the closing greeting ἄσπασαι τοὺς φιλοῦντας ἡμᾶς ἐν πίστει in Tit 315 cf. P Fay 11978 (c. A.D. 100) ἀσπάζου ᾿Επαγαθὸν καὶ τοὺς φιλοῦντες ἡμᾶς πρὸς ἀλήθιαν, and BGU III. 81438 (iii/A-D.) ἀσπάζομαι καὶ το]ὺς φιλοῦντοί-- αἧς ἡμᾶς πάντες. It is possible, however, that, following Wilcken’s suggestion (Avchiv vi. p. 379), we should in both these passages read ὑμᾶς for ἡμᾶς in keeping with the form the greeting takes elsewhere, as P Fay 118? (A.D. 110) ἀσπάϊζου τοὺς φιλοῦντές σε πάντες πρὸς ἀλήθιαν, PSI I. 944 (ii/A.p.) ἄσπασαι Τερεῦν καὶ τοὺς φιλοῦντάς σε πάντας, and P Giss I. 128 (ii/A.D.) ἐπισκοποῦμαι τὴν σὴν σύνβιον καὶ τοὺς φιλοῦντάς σε πάντας. In any case Wilcken (/.c.: cf. Ziemann Zfzst. p. 329 f.) regards this use of ὑμᾶς [σε] φιλοῦντας for ἡμᾶς φιλοῦντας, which we might have expected, as one of the finer touches of these ancient letters, even if it had become largely stereotyped and formal. He knows no instance of its use earlier than about A.D. 100. If φιλέω and ἀγαπάω (7.v.) are to be distinguished in the NT, the former is probably the love of friendship, the latter reverential love; but there appears to be a growing tendency

φιλέω (phileō) — to love. φῐλέω, Aeolic dialect φίλημμι [Refs 7th c.BC+]; 2nd pers. singular φίλησθα Ead.22; late 3rd.pers. plural φίλεισι [Refs 2nd c.AD+]: Boeotian dialect φίλειμι Hdn.Gr.[Refs]infinitive φιλήμεναι [Refs 8th c.BC+]: Ionic dialect and Epic dialect imperfect φιλέεσκε [Refs]future φιλήσω, Epic dialect infinitive φιλησέμεν [Refs 8th c.BC+]: aorist 1 ἐφίλησα [Refs 5th c.BC+], etc.: perfect πεφίληκα[Refs]:—middle, poetical [Refs] aorist ἐφῑλάμη; 3rd.pers. singular ἐφίλατο, φίλατο, [Refs 8th c.BC+]; 3rd.pers. plural φίλαντο [Refs 8th c.BC+]; subjunctive φίλωνται [Refs 8th c.BC+]; but φίλατο as passive, [Refs 3rd c.BC+]; also participle φιλάμενος [Refs] —passive, future middle φιλήσομαι in passive sense, [Refs 8th c.BC+]: future 3 πεφιλήσομαι [Refs 3rd c.BC+]: aorist ἐφιλήθην [Refs 5th c.BC+]: Epic dialect 3rd.pers. plural ἐφίληθεν [Refs 8th c.BC+]: perfect πεφίλημαι [Refs 5th c.BC+]; Doric dialect participle πεφιλᾱμένος [Refs 3rd c.BC+]. [ῐ exceptin the forms ἐφίλατο, φῑλατο, etc.]: (φίλος):— love, regard with affection, opposed to μισεῖν, [Refs 5th c.BC+]; (on its relation to sexual love see below 3); of the love of gods for men, φ. δέ ἑ μητίετα Ζεύς [Refs 8th c.BC+]; πέρι γάρ μ᾽ ἐφίλει (of the love of the master for his swineherd) [Refs 8th c.BC+]; of love for a child reared, [Refs 8th c.BC+]; ὅσα θεοὶ ἀνθρώποις οὓς φιλοῦσιν [διδόασιν] [Refs 1st c.BC+]; οἱ φιλοῦντές τινα his friends, frequently in messages and letters, [NT+1st c.BC+], etc.; φιλεῖν ἐμαυτήν, αὑτόν, [Refs 5th c.BC+]:—passive, to be beloved by one, ἐκ Διός [Refs 8th c.BC+]; τινι [Refs 5th c.BC+]

2. treat affectionately or kindly, especially welcome, entertain a guest, [Refs 8th c.BC+]; θεὸς (i. e. Calypso) ἥ με.. ἐφίλει τε καὶ ἔτρεφεν [Refs]; τίς ἂν φιλέοντι μάχοιτ; who would quarrel with a kind host? [Refs]; etc.:—passive, παρ᾽ ἄμμι φιλήσεαι welcome shalt thou be in our house, [Refs 8th c.BC+]

3. opposed to ἐρᾶν, τούτους μάλιστά φασι φιλεῖν ὧν ἂν ἐρῶσι regard with affection those for whom they have a passion, [Refs 5th c.BC+]; εἰκὸς τὸ φιλεῖν τοὺς ἐρωμένους [Refs 4th c.BC+]; but φ. is used of lovers, ἥ γ᾽ Εὐρυμάχῳ μισγέσκετο καὶ φιλέεσκεν [Refs 8th c.BC+]; of the love of man for wife, ὅς τις ἀνὴρ ἀγαθὸς.. τὴν αὐτοῦ φιλέει (cherishes her) καὶ κήδεται ὡς καὶ ἐγὼ τὴν ἐκ θυμοῦ φίλεον [Refs 8th c.BC+]; τὴν αὐτὸς φιλέεσκεν loved and cherished as his wife, [Refs]; but ἐμὲ.. ἀτιμάζει, φιλέει δ᾽ ἀΐδηλον Ἄρηα (Hephaestus speaks of Aphrodite) [Refs 8th c.BC+]

3. b of sexual intercourse, [Refs 5th c.AD+]

4. show outward signs of love, especially kiss (not in [Refs 8th c.BC+] kiss on the mouth, opposed to τὰς παρειὰς φιλέονται, [NT+5th c.BC+] the kiss wherewith she kissed him, [Refs 2nd c.BC+] —middle, τὰς παρειάς kiss each other's cheeks, Hdt. [prev. cited]

5. of things as objects of love, like, approve, σχέτλια ἔργα [Refs 8th c.BC+]; τὰς λευκοτάτας [μάζας] [Refs 5th c.BC+]

6. of things as the subject, ἡσυχία δὲ φιλεῖ συμπόσιον [Refs 5th c.BC+]

7. in making a request, οἶσθ᾽ ὁτιὴ φιλῶ σ᾽ ἐγώ, κἀμοὶ πιθόμενος ὑπαποκίνει τῆς ὁδοῦ [Refs 5th c.BC+]; so τί πράσσει Φηλικίων ὁ ἀγαθό; φιλῶ σε pray, how goes it with the worthy Felicio? [Refs 3rd c.BC+] (but rather 'I speak as a true friend').

II. after [Refs 8th c.BC+], with infinitive, love to do, be fond of doing, and so to be wont or used to do, φιλέει ὁ θεὸς τὰ ὑπερέχοντα κολούειν [Refs 5th c.BC+]; rarely with participle for infinitive, φιλεῖς δὲ δρῶσ᾽ αὐτὸ σφόδρα [Refs 5th c.BC+]

II.2. of things, events, etc., αὔρη ἀπὸ ψυχροῦ τινος φιλέει πνέειν [Refs 5th c.BC+] of what usually happens, ἀπὸ πείρης πάντα ἀνθρώποισι φιλέει γίνεσθαι everything comes to man by experience, [Refs 5th c.BC+]; without γίγνεσθαι, οἷα δὴ φιλεῖ as is wont, [Refs 5th c.BC+]

II.3. impersonal, φιλέει δέ κως προσημαίνειν (i.e. ὁ θεός), εὖτ᾽ ἂν.. [Refs 5th c.BC+]; ὡς δὴ φιλεῖ.. λόγον ἔχειν ἀνθρώπους as it is usual for.., [Refs 1st c.AD+]