What is a successful (good) creation for God?

[public hermit]

At the consummation of all things, what does success look like for God's creation? We have three options that have been believed by various Christians throughout the history of Christian faith.

Eternal life/Eternal damnation (Augustine): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some rational souls for eternal life through Christ. However, God does not eliminate evil in all but perpetuates it by preserving those who willfully reject God in eternal torment. Conclusion: Failure since sin and evil, found in those rational souls that reject their ultimate good, persists for all eternity by God's will.

Eternal life/Annihilation (Arnobius of Sicca): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some for eternal life through Christ and eliminating evil in rational souls. However, this elimination of evil includes the annihilation of some rational souls who willfully reject their ultimate good. Conclusion: Partial success since the result is the elimination of evil in rational souls but God loses some of God's good creation by destroying it.

Eternal life/Universal restoration (Gregory of Nyssa): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving all for eternal life through Christ. Some are saved in this life and others in the age to come through the remedial punishment of divine love until all rational souls reject sin and evil, willfully bending the knee and confessing Christ as Lord, after which Christ will hand the consummated kingdom over and God will be all in all. Conclusion: Complete success since God succeeds in eliminating all evil in all rational souls and saving all of God's good creation.

Note: It should be noted that Nyssa (the Pillar of Orthodoxy and Father of Fathers) taught the complete and absolute elimination of evil through reconciliation in Christ without destroying good. "Evil must necessarily be eliminated, absolutely and in every respect, once and for all" (On the Soul and Resurrection 101).

"For, thanks to all the respects in which Christ has mixed with humanity, having passed through all that is proper to the human nature, birth, nourishment, growth, and having gone as far as the trial of death, he has accomplished all the tasks I have mentioned, both liberating the human being from evil and healing even the inventor of evilness." (Great Catechetical Oration 26).

It seems clear that divine success at the consummation can only be the universal restoration of all. Anything short of that ranges from failure to partial success. Eternal damnation means that God wilfully perpetuates evil for eternity. Annihilation means God loses some of God's good creation. Do you agree or disagree?

 

[Clare73]

At the consummation of all things, what does success look like for God's creation? We have three options that have been believed by various Christians throughout the history of Christian faith.

Eternal life/Eternal damnation (Augustine): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some rational souls for eternal life through Christ. However, God does not eliminate evil in all but perpetuates it by preserving those who willfully reject God in eternal torment. Conclusion: Failure since sin and evil, found in those rational souls that reject their ultimate good, persists for all eternity by God's will.

Eternal life/Annihilation (Arnobius of Sicca): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some for eternal life through Christ and eliminating evil in rational souls. However, this elimination of evil includes the annihilation of some rational souls who willfully reject their ultimate good. Conclusion: Partial success since the result is the elimination of evil in rational souls but God loses some of God's good creation by destroying it.

Eternal life/Universal restoration (Gregory of Nyssa): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving all for eternal life through Christ. Some are saved in this life and others in the age to come through the remedial punishment of divine love until all rational souls reject sin and evil, willfully bending the knee and confessing Christ as Lord, after which Christ will hand the consummated kingdom over and God will be all in all. Conclusion: Complete success since God succeeds in eliminating all evil in all rational souls and saving all of God's good creation.

Note: It should be noted that Nyssa (the Pillar of Orthodoxy and Father of Fathers) taught the complete and absolute elimination of evil through reconciliation in Christ without destroying good. "Evil must necessarily be eliminated, absolutely and in every respect, once and for all" (On the Soul and Resurrection 101).

"For, thanks to all the respects in which Christ has mixed with humanity, having passed through all that is proper to the human nature, birth, nourishment, growth, and having gone as far as the trial of death, he has accomplished all the tasks I have mentioned, both liberating the human being from evil and healing even the inventor of evilness." (Great Catechetical Oration 26).

It seems clear that divine success at the consummation can only be the universal restoration of all. Anything short of that ranges from failure to partial success. Eternal damnation means that God wilfully perpetuates evil for eternity. Annihilation means God loses some of God's good creation. Do you agree or disagree?

The successful creation for God is the one that is.

It was designed this way to accomplish his purpose; i.e., the manifestation of the glory of his goodness in his marvelous wisdom, to the principalities and powers of the air (spirits, both holy and evil), in the glory of his Son.

Jesus did not present universal salvation in Mk 9.

I see the NT as presenting eternal damnation because that is what God/Jesus would have us believe.
And that is good enough for me.

Just as with the creation account, I see that as what God would have us believe.
If it is different, I will know it when he reveals it.

 

[Hmm]

Do you agree or disagree?

I agree. I actually think it's a no-brainer. God desires and wills that all are saved so if even one person is destroyed or winds up in an eternal hell, then His will is not done. He has been defeated by sin and evil. Christ came to save the lost but He would have failed. He died for the sins of the world but the cross would have been defeated and sin perpetuated into eternity.

He would also have failed in creating a heaven where there are no more tears. No one could be joyful in heaven knowing that some of their loved ones have been lost or will be suffering forever.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

At the consummation of all things, what does success look like for God's creation? We have three options that have been believed by various Christians throughout the history of Christian faith.

Eternal life/Eternal damnation (Augustine): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some rational souls for eternal life through Christ. However, God does not eliminate evil in all but perpetuates it by preserving those who willfully reject God in eternal torment. Conclusion: Failure since sin and evil, found in those rational souls that reject their ultimate good, persists for all eternity by God's will.

Eternal life/Annihilation (Arnobius of Sicca): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some for eternal life through Christ and eliminating evil in rational souls. However, this elimination of evil includes the annihilation of some rational souls who willfully reject their ultimate good. Conclusion: Partial success since the result is the elimination of evil in rational souls but God loses some of God's good creation by destroying it.

Eternal life/Universal restoration (Gregory of Nyssa): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving all for eternal life through Christ. Some are saved in this life and others in the age to come through the remedial punishment of divine love until all rational souls reject sin and evil, willfully bending the knee and confessing Christ as Lord, after which Christ will hand the consummated kingdom over and God will be all in all. Conclusion: Complete success since God succeeds in eliminating all evil in all rational souls and saving all of God's good creation.

Note: It should be noted that Nyssa (the Pillar of Orthodoxy and Father of Fathers) taught the complete and absolute elimination of evil through reconciliation in Christ without destroying good. "Evil must necessarily be eliminated, absolutely and in every respect, once and for all" (On the Soul and Resurrection 101).

"For, thanks to all the respects in which Christ has mixed with humanity, having passed through all that is proper to the human nature, birth, nourishment, growth, and having gone as far as the trial of death, he has accomplished all the tasks I have mentioned, both liberating the human being from evil and healing even the inventor of evilness." (Great Catechetical Oration 26).

It seems clear that divine success at the consummation can only be the universal restoration of all. Anything short of that ranges from failure to partial success. Eternal damnation means that God wilfully perpetuates evil for eternity. Annihilation means God loses some of God's good creation. Do you agree or disagree?

Have you seen the movie "Interstellar"?

... yeah, in approaching the trilemma of your OP here, I kind of feel like "that guy." That's all I'm going to say, my friend.

Peace.

 

[public hermit]

It should also be pointed out that those who say Christ died for all humanity but only some are saved is an explicit declaration that God failed to accomplished what Christ was sent to do. On this point, Calvinists at least limit the sufficiency of Christ's work to those who are saved. Of course, both positions regard success as limited in scope, which is hardly success for an omnipotent, omniscient, omni-benevolent God. Perhaps God is not powerful enough for complete success? Or, maybe God is not love, but is parsimonious in dishing out grace on a mere whim.

I am convinced that anything short of universal restoration fails to give proper glory to God. Happily, divine love is neither weak nor stingy. Our blessed hope is in Jesus Christ, the crucified and raised, "who must remain in heaven until the time of universal restoration that God announced long ago through his holy prophets." Acts 3:21

 

[Clare73]

It should also be pointed out that those who say Christ died for all humanity but only some are saved is an explicit declaration that God failed to accomplished what Christ was sent to do. On this point, Calvinists at least limit the sufficiency of Christ's work to those who are saved. Of course, both positions regard success as limited in scope, which is hardly success for an omnipotent, omniscient, omni-benevolent God. Perhaps God is not powerful enough for complete success? Or, maybe God is not love, but is parsimonious in dishing out grace on a mere whim.

I am convinced that anything short of universal restoration fails to give proper glory to God.

Which assumes you, rather than God, determines the measure of what is proper glory to God.

That's some tricky territory you are trying to navigate based on your own reasoning.

 

[public hermit]

He has been defeated by sin and evil. Christ came to save the lost but He would have failed. He died for the sins of the world but the cross would have been defeated and sin perpetuated into eternity

That's the unavoidable conclusion if one sheep is left as lost. Christ came because of God's love for the cosmos, but that love failed. The Father had "given him authority over all flesh" (John 17:2), in order that we might have life, abundant life, but either couldn't or wouldn't use that authority to it's fullest measure. That's not great news.

 

[Hmm]

That's the unavoidable conclusion if one sheep is left as lost.

Agreed, although that doesn't stop people from desperately trying to avoid it. The argument and we've already seen it used above, is that everlasting torture or destruction of His children does not mean that God has failed but rather means that He has succeeded in achieving His purpose of showing His glory and justice (or something like that ). This is a completely nonsensical argument to me but it seems to be the best there is ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

 

[public hermit]

Think about what it means for God to ensure those who reject the good persist in that state eternally. There was a time when there was no evil for "evil does not exist from eternity (ex aidiou), and therefore it will not subsist eternally...Being in evil properly means non-being, since evil itself has no ontological subsistence of its own; what originates evil, indeed, is rather a lack of Good." Nyssa from On the Titles of the Psalms

But those who propose that God condemn those who reject the good to an eternal state of evil make God the preserver of evil since that which has no ontological subsistence, except for its lack of Good, is made by God to persist eternally. Not only does God fail to succeed in overcoming evil with good, but God purposely overcomes good with evil!!


How did Christians ever come to accept such a horrendous doctrine in no way worthy of the goodness, love, and power of God?

 

[public hermit]

This is a completely nonsensical argument to me but it seems to be the best there is

It's completely nonsensical to me, as well. Let's face it, it's an ad hoc attempt to justify the horrendous.

 

[Hmm]

How did Christians ever come to accept such a horrendous doctrine in no way worthy of the goodness, love, and power of God?

It's a fascinating question. I don't see ECT supported in the Bible (once the well-known mistranslations of aionios, kolasis etc have been corrected), nor by the Early Church and nor by common morality and rationality.

So why is there such an insistence that God sends most of us to eternal torture and that it's heretical not to believe this?

Paul describes God's judgment as like a refining fire that makes salvation possible by either leaving good works intact or burning up bad works so that the person can saved "as though by fire" (1 Corinthians 3:15).

Revelation seems to be Team Hell's best bet but this is obviously a vision and uses dream and allegorical language and is not meant for a dogma such as ECT to be built upon it.

And there are of course many verses that clearly reference universal restoration such as these:

for as all die in Adam, so all will be made alive in Christ.
1 Corinthians 15:22

Therefore just as one man's trespass led to condemnation for all, so one man's act of righteousness leads to justification and life for all.
Romans 5:18

The main objection to UR seems to be that it allows us to get away with sinning. But this is a straw man and is not what universalism says. Universalism says that we need to repent and make whatever amends are possible. UR deals with sin effectively and removes it completely from existence. It actually takes sin far more seriously than Infernalism, which allows sin and evil to exist forever and ever.

 

[public hermit]

The main objection to UR seems to be that it allows us to get away with sinning. But this is a straw man and is not what universalism says. Universalism says that we need to repent and make whatever amends are possible. UR deals with sin effectively and removes it completely from existence. It actually takes sin far more seriously than Infernalism which allows sin and evil to exist forever and ever

I agree that seems to be the primary objection, and I also agree that it takes sin far more seriously. As @Saint Steven constantly reminds us, we will all be salted with fire. Mark 9:49

None of the early proponents of Universal Restoration rejected the remedial fire of "hell." They all insisted that we need to repent and become obedient to God so that we would be prepared. So, yes, it's far more serious. Easy believism was not found among them.

 

[Andrewn]

Eternal life/Annihilation (Arnobius of Sicca): In this scenario, God succeeds in saving some for eternal life through Christ and eliminating evil in rational souls. However, this elimination of evil includes the annihilation of some rational souls who willfully reject their ultimate good.

How do you define the soul? There are many definitions. Even the Bible and ancient Christian writers use the word "soul" to mean different things. Is the soul the same thing as the spirit? Is it the same thing as the inner being? The same thing as the nous? The same thing as the heart? All these expressions are used in the Bible, and we are lost without definitions.

It should also be pointed out that those who say Christ died for all humanity but only some are saved is an explicit declaration that God failed to accomplished what Christ was sent to do.

By "some" do you mean some souls? Some spirits? Some egos? Some bodies? Some personalities? Some consciousnesses?

 

[public hermit]

How do you define the soul? There are many definitions. Even the Bible and ancient Christian writers use the word "soul" to mean different things. Is the soul the same thing as the spirit? Is it the same thing as the inner being? The same thing as the nous? The same thing as the heart? All these expressions are used in the Bible, and we are lost without definitions.


By "some" do you mean some souls? Some spirits? Some egos? Some bodies? Some personalities? Some consciousnesses?

I know from past posts that you have a specific understanding of human anthropology as concerns the soul, spirit, body division. I'm not clear on your understanding but would be happy to hear how your understanding relates to the OP topic.

By rational soul, I simply mean created beings that can choose between good and evil. That doesn't have to be restricted to humanity. Nyssa makes no such restriction, which is why I included the note.

Edit: I probably should have just said rational creatures but I'm too lazy to go change it. I don't think it makes any difference to the main thrust of the OP.

 

[Andrewn]

It's a fascinating question. I don't see ECT supported in the Bible (once the well-known mistranslations of aionios, kolasis etc have been corrected), nor by the Early Church and nor by common morality and rationality.

To give an example of how English mistranslations affect theology, I was reading Rom 4:13, which is completely unrelated to the subject of UR. Most translations have a variant of the following:

Rom 4:13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would inherit the world was not through the law, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.

But the word translated "descendants" is literally "seed" and refers to the Lord Jesus. It is translated correctly in the NKJV, TLV (Messianic Jewish version), and the Orthodox New Testament. Clearly, this changes the meaning of the verse completely.

 

[Saint Steven]

It seems clear that divine success at the consummation can only be the universal restoration of all. Anything short of that ranges from failure to partial success. Eternal damnation means that God wilfully perpetuates evil for eternity. Annihilation means God loses some of God's good creation. Do you agree or disagree?

Great topic, thanks.
Anything short of UR just looks like poor planning.

 

[Der Alte]

Great topic, thanks.
Anything short of UR just looks like poor planning.

Was it "poor planning" on God's part in Jeremiah 13:21-24?
Was it "poor planning" on Jesus' part in Matthew 7:21-23?

 

[Saint Steven]

At the consummation of all things, what does success look like for God's creation?

The creation was "good".
But it was only a beginning, not an end in itself.
It follows then, that if the creation was good at the beginning,
it will be equally as good at its end. (the culmination)

However...
The view of some is that it will be far less than good at the end.
Perhaps not by their admission, but the facts are the facts.

 

[Jeff Saunders]

How do you define the soul? There are many definitions. Even the Bible and ancient Christian writers use the word "soul" to mean different things. Is the soul the same thing as the spirit? Is it the same thing as the inner being? The same thing as the nous? The same thing as the heart? All these expressions are used in the Bible, and we are lost without definitions.


By "some" do you mean some souls? Some spirits? Some egos? Some bodies? Some personalities? Some consciousnesses?

I know how I would define the soul. I see it as what we make and do with our life . Jesus said if we want to keep our soul we must lose it die to self and live the life of following him just as he did. He came to serve not to be served and if anyone should be served it was him. But if we try to save our soul we will lose it , what good does it do to gain the whole world and lose our soul. The second death is the death of the soul not your spirit, all that you build and accumulate on earth is lost forever. But if we give up our soul and live for Jesus we skip the second death and keep on progressing with our life but with a new glorified body. That’s why scripture says the the word (Jesus) is sharper than a double edged sword dividing the soul from the spirit.

 

[Saint Steven]

Jeff Saunders
It seems to some that it was good but then satan came in and messed it up and now God is trying to save some of it , he wants all but dang sin is just too strong.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

What to do, what to do... ???
God didn't see that coming. Talk about a bad day at the office. Wow, what a mess.
Oh, I know, I know... maybe a global flood. Flush this mess down the crapper. - LOL

Actually, God said it was good at the end of each day in the creation week.
No worries, God is still sovereign. Despite the way things appear.

@Jeff Saunders