Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.
The Historic Faith
Sign in
All Questions
Question 6
Bercot admits commentators wrongly treat *agape* as a special Christian word, while in the Septuagint it covers everything from romantic love to “love of wrong things”; how might that broader Septuagint usage confront common evangelical teaching that treats “agape love” as automatically pure, spiritual, and uniquely Christian?
Another way to ask: Bercot says *agape* in the Septuagint can mean many kinds of love, even wrong kinds. How does that challenge the common idea that “agape love” always means pure, spiritual, uniquely Christian love?

Direct Answer Bercot’s point confronts the assumption that the word *agape* automatically signals uniquely Christian, spiritually pure love; the transcript suggests it is simply the common Septuagint word for “love,” and context—not the mere word itself—must determine whether the love is good or corrupt.

Support from Transcript:

  • He says many commentators claim *agape* was rare in classical Greek and therefore became “a special word for Christian love, a type of love the world doesn’t know.”
  • Bercot calls that conclusion ignorance of the Septuagint: “commentators reveal their own ignorance about the Septuagint.”
  • He explains Septuagint usage: *agape* is what translators “normally used to translate the Hebrew word for love.”
  • Crucially, they use it “for every kind of love, from romantic love to love of wrong things.”
  • Therefore, “Jesus and his apostles were simply using a term the Greek-speaking Jews were very familiar with because of reading the Septuagint.”
Discussion Follow-ups If *agape* can describe bad loves too, how should that change the way we preach or counsel using the phrase “agape love” as if it guarantees moral purity?

Jumpstarter 6 of 10
Back Questions Next