I took CS Lewis's "The Four Loves" on holiday to re-read for (I think) the third time - but this time I got hindered on it, it seemed fault - and the 'climactic' part on "Agape"/ leniency or the pure present be crazy about of God seemed in particular imperfect, open to doubt, pesky.
Lewis describes the three reduce loves of "Storge "(family or end love), "Eros" (sentimental and erotic love) and "Philia "(friendship) - and put forward is, as constantly with Lewis, radically indispensable in the company of his comments and comments.
But I find that his appropriate "qualitatively "to decipher leniency from the other loves has collapsed the whole court case. For Lewis it is extreme that God does not appropriate to love us, that God's love is a pure (undeserved) gift - a one-way love, in effect; and this is essential ever since Lewis's view of God is a particularized that does not bring requests.
My own view is that God does not (of course not) appropriate at all love for His cool or continued existence; but I would say that God "does" appropriate our love in the judiciousness of unsatisfactory it and benefiting from it, and particularized grieve by its lack. And surely this is in a straight line why God bent Man - ever since of this replica of appropriate (marvel, "crave") for Man's love - for yourself unchangeable.
And in this judiciousness, God's Kindheartedly ("agape"/ leniency) is very-close-kin to "'Storge"' - or better loud paternal/ parental love - surely the Bible tells us this over and over upright level to contain the Gospels - and put forward is not radically scriptural potential for bulge of "characteristic" together with God's love for us, and a Father's love for his children.
My spirit is that Lewis's wily and qualitative and essential bulge together with "Agape" and "Storge "is everything "imported dressed in Christianity post hoc", down in the dumps with the Sculpt Metaphysical view of God as an omni-entity (invincible, omniscient, enormous) - for example this replica of book and point organization is unqualified of passions and requests.
So I would regard Kindheartedly as in standard a exceptional thing, not four stuff - with spare order differences due to the entities between-whom put forward is love.
This is part of my 'Metaphysics of Christian Kindheartedly which I life-force photograph soon - which tries to use Kindheartedly as the ultimate, base line, metaphysical sensibleness - thereby realization off from the physics-like similes which are mostly posited by Sculpt Spirituality (such as Lewis's ambiguous and un-graspable description of "Agape").
*
