That is terrible non sequitur. Words have meanings and we know for a fact that there are differences between these words and the authors encouraged to exercise both. Big deal. You think it's synonymous solely because Paul and Titus encourage both. That is literally non sequitur and an exegetical fallacy of assumed synonym.

Go ahead, be dismissive still, and try to think yourself justified by calling it an exegetical fallacy when any objective Bible student approaching the two passages will see the point.

The Bible was revealed in Hebrew and Koiné Greek, not English nor Chinese, so I don't see why you quip that I went to the original language and showed there are differences.

I'm saying and demonstrating that your understanding of Greek on these two words is corrupt by the opinion of men. The usage alone in Greek in similar instances shows they are synonymous.

But they don't, that's the issue. They aren't synonymous. And complaining that I went to the original language and how those two words were used by Greek at the time is irrelevant.

Being Sola Scriptura does not mean we cannot use external sources to study and know the social context of the Bible.

Okay, last example since you aren'y paying attention. Go to John 3:35.

"The Father loveth the Son"

There it is agape.

Now, turn to John 5:20.

"For the Father loveth the Son" -- there it is phileo

Well yes, The Father has phileal relationship with the Son, and?

Same statement both places--if there is any difference in the two, if phileo is not as grand as agape, did God's love for His Son degrade between two chapters?

You haven't proved synonymity, all you are showing is The Father loves the Son in two different senses. That is not problematic.

The passages are not even attempting to demonstrate like there is different love of God the Father for His Son.

I reject your false premise that I meant to imply phileos is a degradation. That is a strawman.

Okay, but yet you puff up agape like it's the only thing we should have when God clearly uses phileo in many instances

You're just inconsistent and maybe you haven't thought through things all that well

If you read it in the original Greek, you can tell that The Father loves the Son in two different ways. That is not a big deal. You making it out to be a problem is silly.

But the context is not teaching as that He loves Him in different ways. That's only a sense you think you find because you think you know there's a difference between the words.

You have too much book smarts for your own good

No, I am not. I recognize The Father Loves God phileally as well as Agape sense. Those don't prove they are synonyms.

The Bible is a book as well, so yeah.

A compilation of books.

A book of books.

You know I made a distinction before so no need to be snarky

And you imply as if being "book smart" is inherently bad in this conversation.

I find that absurd.

Especially since it's important to know the social and cultural significance of the Greco-Roman culture and how they understood those two words.

You can know books more and have too much concentration on them and your knowledge of the Bible actually deteriorates.

Like I said, being Sola Scriptura does not equate to rejecting any attempt to study the cultural background at that time.

Yes, but scholarship doesn't trump the actual Bible itself. You are acting like you are also saying "Sola Scholarship" and let's listen to them.

No, there you go strawmanning me again.

That must be your favorite rebuttal

I never implied to "only listen" to scholars. I am saying that *given what we know* from their culture and how they would have used those terms in their daily life, your conclusion that they are synonyms is incorrect and your chain of reasoning to show that it creates a theological conundrum is flawed.

I want to know more about the bible and understanding it. Looking for some reliable resources to guide me. Either books, YouTubers, audiobooks, authors

Greek culture of the time has no absolute bearing on the Bible usage itself for there are some words that occur only there. And, you cannot look to culture as definitive for something Biblical/Christian. Go on the street and ask some passerby what their definition is of love, and you will not get a Christian one, I'm sure.

It's good to be informed, but that information is not authoritative

Jason Lisle's book *Understanding Genesis*, James Patrick Holding's YouTube channel *tektontv* and Jonathan Sarfati's commentary on Genesis titled *The Genesis Account* are good starts.
For New Testament culture, David DeSilva's *Honor, Patronage, Kinsjip & Purity* is a good source as well.

@Smash Boy thank you. When I go to church or listen to a message online, I hear the same things and haven't developed a deeper understanding which I know is something I need

@mo-me119 See if you can find Wilmington's Guide to the Bible. It is an excellent resource.