Parngrply: Marvin, Fini and he use ofSecuality ‘Be SrucureofLove The Pipl of Sx and Lave (2 edition) emporary Readings (Gein) li: A Ppl Enepeia (ek Sex, Love, and Fendi, ele 1 EROS, AGAPE, AND PHILIA Readings in the Philosophy of LovePubli th Unie Soe by Peon Howe sewn Paagtone com Cope © 1989 Pag Home Absigh are Nop dios nay be pd nay iraeyof Congr Caapngin Pian Det ‘appanage pong of Lone ie, ‘An Slee ising: ANTE Lasreares Love Sole Aen, assets Manin the Unie Soe of Americ. “Tepper nh pbleion mete minima eget of ‘Antes Nona! Stn for lformaionScnces—Pemanene of Paper ee Proted Lira Mae, ANSIZI98 1988, 109876543 ne A KS FB coat SE For Sara and RachelAGAPE AND EROS Anders Nygren ‘Tue ConTENT OF THE IDEA OF ACAPE ova muir ne sont pce pny us gen a nor eet ee rear net ste teorted ee Oe ne ce tm nt al aaa eee eens ine Ge Cog te anette pall pete sagt deme oer eae a a eee phedicree Bing eet ce th Se ar ae Cae et ca icons ee ole eal ee eer ane ano cu tiny nitrite ymin ne ee eenieawin eae emer Seer 7 8sIts this ove, spontaneous and “unmotvated—having no mative outside ‘sl, in the pesonal worth of men-—which characterizes slo the scton of Jers seeking oat tele and consring wih "pubians and sinners: Iwas preci in this acon, which fram the point of view fg reltionships was Incyplicable and indefrle, that He Knew Hirself arying ot the Father ‘akan evealing Hisrind and wil. When flonhip with Cod isconecived ‘fas egal relatonship, Divine love mustin theatres be dependent onthe ‘orth ofits object Bat in Chit there freee a Divine love which brea rounds, refusing to be contled by the value oft objet, and being dete ‘mined only by ts own inns atte. Acordng a Chron, "motivated Jove is human spontaneous and “unmotivated owe is Die "This being s0, we can see why fens wat bound to atck «lions seationship conceived in egal terms. Had He been concerned only to claim lace forte ide of oe the mt gnera nt within the eligi elton ‘hip, He could have scured even within the legal chem. There wat mo ned to smash he eal scheme in ede to do that. The love for which thre ‘oom in this scheme, However, i the "motated” lve that i dicted to he fighteous, fo thse who deserve But Jers int concerned with ve inthis ‘ordnay seni, but with the spontaneous, unmotated lane Wats Age and foc thstheres arena no place within the amnenodk of ea order To sgotack one more tothe wods of ein Mat. 17, we may sy that ae {the mew wine which invita burt the ld wisn, Now we se alo why therehad tobe eoloonay change of atid vad the rghcous and te sinner If Godt love were esricted othe righteous it would be evoked by is ‘objet and otspontancus tut bythe fat that tees snes who donot deserve tan ca yo li tt nanos motley sponta snl unmotnted naire a) Agape s"indifret oval." This doe not relly add anything new to what has aleady ben said bat in order to prevent posible misundetad ing, itis neces to give special emphasis to onesie the point we have justmade. When Jesus matesthe righteou apd sinner change paces itmight 2tfistsight ppen aif tis were a mate simple tansaluson, or imension ‘of values ot we have alteady sald encugh to sbow that it quson of something far deeper Its at that eu simpy revere the generally accepted standard of vales and holds that the sinner "eter than the ghee. Toe asitstosay that Heeflerteda"ranwalaton fal ale," yet he phrase ean asl gv seo ale impression Actual sarething ft deeper import than any “tansaluation” i inaled he—-namey the principle that ony ‘thought of valuation whatever is out of place in connection with flop with God: When Gods love idee wo the sine, then the poiton cet, allthougt of aluaton is exladd in avane fof Cad the aly One, loves ‘he sine, i cannot be Beau o isn, ut in pit hiss. But hen ‘Aone ond Bree 5 God love i shown tothe righteous and golly dere i aay the risk of our thinking thet Cod loves the man on acount of his righteouses and godliness But this denial of Agape if Cod love forthe "righteous wer ot jst tsunmotvtd nd epontaneour at His lave forthe sinner Asif thre were 2m ‘ther Divine love than spontaneous and unmoved Agape! eis only when all thought of the worthines ofthe object is abandoned that we can ues that Agape is. Cad oe allows no limits to be et frit by the character anduc of man, The dition between the woth andthe uw he aed the sine, set no bounds to His love. “He maketh His sun to fae on the evil andthe good, and sendeth rin on the jst andthe unjust (at 43) 1G) Ase creative. When we sck to analyze the strate ofthe ida of ‘Age, what fit tiacts out steno i it sontaneocs and unmotivated ‘harace, Thi, a wehave desrbeditsbove shows that we aredealing with love of quite nique lind. The deepest reason for its uniqueness, howeves, Ina yel bee tated, What lima dec fr the meaning of Agape ‘anon be scen when we aberve that it Divine love and therefore shares in the ceatvenes thats chatacters ofall he ile of God. Agape is creative love. God doe not ove tht which sales intel worthy oflve,buton the ‘conta, tht which in lf as no worth aqures worth just by becoming the ‘het of Cr love. Agape hs nothing todo wih te kil flee that depends nthe recognition of valuable quality intr objec, ape does ot ecognize ‘alu, buteresterit. Agape loves, ad impart value by loving. The man whois Teveby Gol hs no vale in ul what gives him vale precisely the ct that Gad loves him, Agape alerting prin "We hve row ached the deepest ar lately decisive feture of the en cof Agape feature which itm e sid has been very much obscured in ‘modern thclogy ser since Riehl ime thar been common fo theologians toapeak ofthe infinite valu ofthe human sou” acne of th cena ides oF {Chnstianty and fo connet it with he iden of Coa they love." Thus A te Harnad in Dor Wen ds Chistetur, clas thatthe teaching of us Sit whe can be grouped wader thee heads each of soch amar a 10 ‘onan the whale and one of hee he ents “Cod the Father athe infinite ‘ale ofthe human soul To this, however, weean ight object that thee ‘of “the infinite vale ofthe human soul by no means a central ies of ‘Gursianity. Only» fae exegesis hax made it posable to al support fox this de in the oft-qoted panape: "What dth it profit a man, to gun the whole ‘wolfe his ie (A soul? For what should aman give in exchange Tehsil (A soul" (Mark, 366). Merevet, Hammack statement at “Zl who bear a human fae ate of more vale than the whale worl shows ‘er cleat that the thought of an infinite value of his Kinda belonging to ‘nan by nar art oo eewhere than in Christan.What chil interests user, however, isthe destuctv fc hat his idea ‘at ad on the coneetion of Divine love. The suggestion that man sby naire ‘posed ofsuchanindlinabe value, easly gives is the thought that itis {hismachls value on which Gods love set. Even though the Divine spk ‘may sem tohave been whelly quenched in aman snkin si, itis nonetheless {resent in “all who bea a human fice,” ands potentials are capable of ‘ing actualized in eer, Viewed in this light, God forgiveness of ine means merely that He deguds the manifold felts nds ofthe outward Iie an looks only atthe inward, imperishable value which not even sn as ‘been able to destroy. Hi forgiving ove mean tht He ses nd values the peal fret price, regadles fhe deblement that happens at sat lingo He oyeroks the defects and imperfections and conceiates on the esence of the penalty which wins is approbaton.» "his interpetation of Divine forgiveness and love wee cect, Gd ove ould notin telat esrtbe spontaneous and netted but would have an deqste motive inthe infinite value inherent in human naire, The forge- ‘tof ie would then imply merely the recognition ofan aieady exiting ‘ale. Butts evident enough that this is ot the forgiveness of sins as Joss ‘pdestanes it When He say, “Thy sins are forgiven thee,” this smo merely formal atesaon ofthe presence of value which justifies the ovelooking of faults tithe betowal ofp. Something really new i intoduced, some thing new is taking place. The forgives of ins is a mative wrk of Divine ver (a) which Jesus knows Himself called wo cary out on eat, at ‘which an be pt on aleve with ther Divine mira, suchas His ealing of the praytic Mak i. 5-12) 14) Ago i the initiator of illwship with Gad. Not only does Agape ‘ono Ors orman sang abo i John Berryman ‘Silt pleads and andes: "Why do you love me?” Replie then armed me dur bu nowt peak, Singing why each should not the ther eek ‘The ete! vil be weaker—in the Blea “our fends I don't ke al ad oct You es than muses, the Bue steak “Tubes me you drink fal hee ae weak Objects they areal and all ree," our choice thought... Who no Cliath has shang lane When one day rushing about your lw yo so im who I aight oo name without sme ae Weurius hnson shold enguite Blow, ‘Who lift this oie hae sh, and beat” As thy sul lve, O ing Teannot el. DEES beter Soa bBo Cah © rt bin ‘ern Re pm ot a as Pei Sf me itr rleaan Amn Hr ce lise Pw 7B