I will literally show you that agape and phileo in how the Bible uses them are equal. They must be equal or there will be theological and other problems that will result.
So the premise here is that you think phileos is a degraded form of love. I think you need to justify this in light of scripture as I never implied they are degraded forms.
No, I caught your statement right, but I was trying to help you wean off of a bunch of Greek scholarship nonsense to show that the Bible itself uses the words interchangeably.
Dude, there are inherent grammatical differences. You have not proved at all that they are grammatically the same. That's dishonest. The best you did was that they are both integral to our relationship as Christians and God. I never denied this. I said that between phileos and agape, Agape is the most important and the most foundational. The latter is key.
Dude, I am aware that brotherly love is important in the Christian community. I am not denying this. I am aware of the familial dynamics that are essential that the Christian community and God instills in the Church. This isn't the point. My point is that between Agape and Phileos, Agape is *foundational*, and phileos is a consequence of that love.
We are to have phileos among Christians since we consider ourselves brother and sisters in Christ, but Agape is at the foundation and yes, they are grammatically different. This is common knowledge among NT Scholars and those who know well on Greek.
No, not how the Bible puts it or there will be problems, as I said. So, you conclude that the wife's love for her husband is consequent (phileo) on the husband loving her (agape)? That's teaching something the Bible doesn't teach.
