When a scribe asked Jesus which of the commandments was the greatest, Jesus went over and above and answered by telling the scribe what the two greatest commandments were:

“And Jesus answered him, The first of all the commandments is, Hear, O Israel; The Lord our God is one Lord: (30) And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and with all thy strength: this is the first commandment. (31) And the second is like, namely this, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. There is none other commandment greater than these.” (Mark 12:29-31)

Jesus affirmed that the greatest — and second greatest — commandments were both commandments to love. The difference between the two commandments concerned the object of love and the manner of love.

These commandments had different objects insofar as the first commandment required people to love God, while the second required people to love other people. Since God is greater than His creation (including our neighbors), the first commandment is greater than the second commandment on account of the object of love.

And these commandments also differ with respect to the manner of love that we are supposed to show. Towards God, our love is unlimited and undivided. We’re required to love God with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind. (After all, there is only one God, so our highest dedication does not need to be shared with other divinities.) The second greatest commandment, on the other hand, does not require unlimited love towards our neighbor. Instead, just like it is necessary that we have a healthy love for ourselves without wrongly loving ourselves with all our heart, soul, strength, and mind (which would be both arrogant and idolatrous), it is a reasonable Christian and human duty to love ours neighbors — without making idols of them.

What the two commandments have in common, however, is that they are commandments to love.

But what is love?

If you survey articles on the topic, you’ll find that there are various definitions of love that people offer. One of the most common strategies for defining love is to distinguish types of love and talk about them. For example, maybe there is passion and true love. Or, maybe there’s agape, phileo, and eros. There are excellent insights into love that can be derived from distinctions like these, and I hope to discuss them in future articles.

But there’s a potential problem with starting a discussion about what love is by looking at how some forms of love differ from others. What’s that potential problem? We’re not talking about what love is, as much as we are talking what differentiates types of love.

If I ask, “What is a mammal?”, and you reply, “rabbits are different from whales because rabbits are land mammals that hop around and eat grass, while whales are sea mammals that have blow-holes and are often really large,” I’d be justified in following up your answer by saying: “That’s great. But what is a mammal?” After all, you never told me what a mammal is. You just took it for granted that rabbits and whales were mammals and told me how they are different.

When we’re asked, “What is love?” and we answer, “Well, agape is this, eros is something else, and phileo is a third thing, and they differ from one another in these ways,” etc., it is unclear whether we’ve actually answered the question at all. Perhaps considering these different types of love will be helpful in reflecting on how to answer our question. After all, if these are all types of love, the essence of love must have something to do with what these different types of love have in common. But without this more reflection, distinguishing types of love doesn’t tell us what love is.

So, let’s get to it. What is love?

Love is that which all types of love have in common. What’s that? It is the characteristic of a person that makes them want, as far as is possible, to be in union with the beloved, and then to act on it accordingly — as long as it doesn’t harm the beloved. With this in mind, there are three parts to love:

1. The desire to be with the beloved.
2. The desire for what is good for the beloved (relatedly: to not do anything to harm the beloved).
3. The manifestation of these desires in one’s actions.

Confirmation of this interpretation can be seen when we reflect on any particular type of love. Regardless of what type of love it is, it is love only if it involves a desire to do good to the beloved and a desire for union with the beloved insofar as it is good for the beloved. In the event that you decide that you need to be, or should be, away from the person you love, you accept this either as an undesirable necessity on account of circumstances (for instance, maybe you need to travel for work or health) or because it is necessary for the good of the beloved (for instance, maybe they are making a bad decision in their life and you can’t accompany them on that path).

Agapé, for example, is the self-sacrificial love that God has towards His people. It was on account of this that He became man and suffered and died on a cross to save His people even while they were still enemies. Why did He take this extreme action and how was it the most exemplary instance of love of all time? Jesus Christ became man and died for sinners in order to reconcile these people to Himself through the cross. In other words, He did it in order to take them from being alienated from God as enemies, to being in union with them, and thereby giving them all the benefits and good things that we possess as the children of God. Observe: In agapé, God loves people in such a way that He denies Himself in order to have union with the beloved and to do them good. And that captures our conception of love.

Take another example in the case of eros. In eros, we have the form of love that is romantic and sexual. According to this type of love, when one person has ‘eros’ for the beloved, they desire physical and sexual union with that person, and they desire to do good to that person in love-making or intimacy. Generally, they desire to please and satisfy that person, and to strengthen their union one to the other. When ‘eros’ ceases to be love is, often, when it becomes exclusively self-interested and only preoccupied with pleasing one’s self. When this happens, it ceases to be love and becomes simply lust. So, sexual acts that are selfish, self-interested, abusive, and separated from marriage and life-long commitment, etc., are not pure acts of love. They’re defective and manifestations of carnal lust. Why? Because love — even eros — pursues union with the beloved via sexual and romantic intimacy that is good for the beloved.

Much, much more can be said about the nature of love, how to love better in concrete ways, and other related topics. If you have specific questions about love or would like to see an article addressing your concerns, leave a comment below and let us know what’s on your mind.

Blessings!