Hi Alan,
What's more, Peter knew that Peter couldn't yet love with 'Agape', and that's why he answered honestly, naming every time the only kind of love which he did have - philo.
Third time: 'And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love [philo] thee.
I don't think Jesus was 'playing games'. But, He was helping Peter again to understand his limitations, and that human affection, such as had made Peter offer to die for the Lord, and claim that he would never deny Him, didn't cut the necessary ice. All the disciples were in the same boat as Peter. Matthew 26:35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.
Do you think Peter had forgotten everything he'd ever learned from being with Jesus? I don't think he would have said 'thou knowest all things', if he still thought the Lord might have overlooked something, or, was judging unrighteously.
If your theory is correct, why didn't Peter reply using the word 'Agape', (as in earlier posts you suggested he had)?
Another question: if Peter had been born again in John 20, why was he going fishing in John 21:3?
And Jesus did know that Peter couldn't yet love with 'Agape', because he wasn't born again, yet.Jesus would have know Peter couldn't love with Agape if he wasn't born again
What's more, Peter knew that Peter couldn't yet love with 'Agape', and that's why he answered honestly, naming every time the only kind of love which he did have - philo.
Third time: 'And he said unto him, Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love [philo] thee.
I don't think Jesus was 'playing games'. But, He was helping Peter again to understand his limitations, and that human affection, such as had made Peter offer to die for the Lord, and claim that he would never deny Him, didn't cut the necessary ice. All the disciples were in the same boat as Peter. Matthew 26:35 Peter said unto him, Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. Likewise also said all the disciples.
Do you think Peter had forgotten everything he'd ever learned from being with Jesus? I don't think he would have said 'thou knowest all things', if he still thought the Lord might have overlooked something, or, was judging unrighteously.
If your theory is correct, why didn't Peter reply using the word 'Agape', (as in earlier posts you suggested he had)?
Another question: if Peter had been born again in John 20, why was he going fishing in John 21:3?