How does the idea that most of Gods creation he will have to burn forever bring glory to God?

Aseyesee said:

Is it a sacrifice? or was this the only language man could relate to God in ...

Click to expand...

God empathetically was personal crucified "with" Christ and suffered as much and even more than Christ did. God has also had to allow many of His children to go to hell and annihilation, to help His other children, so yes, he sacrificed.

Jeff Saunders said:

It is only divisive if we let our understanding of the infinite God build walls against others, these same views were around at the start of the church but they didn't really divide each other till Christianity became a religion of Rome, that is where the divisions seem to have started and have only gotten worse from then on.
Division is a choice we make, its easier for me to not have division because I see all of humanity as part of Jesus's body and all are my brothers and sisters in Christ even if they don't know it yet. God is not divided and we are invited into that same union.

Click to expand...

Well, the church decided on one of these according to a church council centuries ago, but it still causes divison.

Furthermore, referencing the seven days of creation, division is part of God's thought process.

Also it seems relevant to note that when Solomon had 10 tribes taken from him, it was an act of God. Something similar happened in Church history, this was called the Reformation.

God may not be divided, but the church definitely is.

Jeff Saunders said:

differing opinions about God are going to happen because God is infinite and we are finite, we can only see a small fraction of God so no one has everything correct but each may have some correct and some wrong, but division happens when you don't love even if your opinions are different.

Click to expand...

All I know is that God is right, and when we see Him, we will become as He is.

And when the new heaven and the new earth is revealed, the former things will not be remembered nor mentioned.

So regardless of how we feel about X Y Z theology, it doesn't matter, because we won't remember anyway.

bling said:

You cannot assume 25%, 25%, 25% and 25%. It could be 1%, 1%, !% and 97% and still fit the parable.

Click to expand...

You’d understand the analogy better if you had gardening or farming experience. It was phrased in those terms for a reason. No matter what‘s planted there’s always loss or seeds that don’t mature or get devoured by pests and a portion that produces. The other thing you missed in the text is how they’re planted. He isn’t digging a hole and dropping in a seed. He takes a handful and scatters them. That’s why some fell along a path. The term for the practice is broadcasting. If you’ve ever seen a meadow with a mixture of flowers you’ve witnessed the same. That’s how they’re formed.

~bella

bling said:

God empathetically was personal crucified "with" Christ and suffered as much and even more than Christ did. God has also had to allow many of His children to go to hell and annihilation, to help His other children, so yes, he sacrificed.

Click to expand...

This is the view of the soul/wilderness (between two pillars) before it is made an eden to us ...

I believe the depths of the purpose that God purposed in himself are without measure, tantamount to an ascending forever; but God spoke (and still speaks) in a relational way to us, not only through the creation, but by son (which has always been the case from the beginning) … who by, and through, we come to this reality of who we are, in relationship to God … that being said … to be a son is to always have been a son, which is the inexhaustible riches of the inheritance of who we are, that we have (as a present truth) being born of God.

Jeff Saunders said:

God punishing sinners justly, eternal hell with no chance of ever repenting is not just.

Click to expand...

They had the chance to repent their whole life, they did not want to. And when we look at the story of Lazarus and rich man, we see the rich man in hell still not repenting.

Are you questioning God's righteousness? Do you know better than Him?

Jeff Saunders said:

Most people on earth have never even had to chance to see God for who he really is in this life,

Click to expand...

That's not true. According to Romans 1, every human being has knowldge of God, but people love evil more than they love God. You know why so many hated Jesus? Because our deeds are dark, and we hate the light. We are evil.

According to Romans 1, there is no such thing as an atheist. Everyone can see God's creation everywhere, and give God the glory. We just don't. You know why? Because we don't want there to be God, a just judge who will judge our sins. We hate God, that's who we are.

Jeff Saunders said:

Yes God does punish sinners but its for correction in the next age.

Click to expand...

Correction in next age? Unless your sins have been washed away by Christ, you will spend eternity in hell, paying for your sins. Either there is a Saviour who redeemed you, reconciled you to God, who took the punishment for you sins, or you will suffer for your sins for eternity. The Bible is full of it.

I hope you do not believe in universalism, which is not Biblical.

We all question God. Now I'm going to turn it on you.
Do you love, obey and serve your Creator in everything He commands you? Why not? People always cry about God how He is unfair, but it is us who are unfair and constatly do evil against God.

bèlla said:

You’d understand the analogy better if you had gardening or farming experience. It was phrased in those terms for a reason. No matter what‘s planted there’s always loss or seeds that don’t mature or get devoured by pests and a portion that produces. The other thing you missed in the text is how they’re planted. He isn’t digging a hole and dropping in a seed. He takes a handful and scatters them. That’s why some fell along a path. The term for the practice is broadcasting. If you’ve ever seen a meadow with a mixture of flowers you’ve witnessed the same. That’s how they’re formed.

~bella

Click to expand...

I have broadcasted many a seed.
My issue is with your "numbers" in "Only 25% were committed to the Lord", which suggest 25% fell on good soil, 25% fell on the path, 25% fell in the weeds and 25% fell on the rocks, which is not what the parable is teaching. Most of the seed would not be wasted by the farmer and would be directed for the good soil, but some would land other places, so how do you get 25%?

Aseyesee said:

This is the view of the soul/wilderness (between two pillars) before it is made an eden to us ...

I believe the depths of the purpose that God purposed in himself are without measure, tantamount to an ascending forever; but God spoke (and still speaks) in a relational way to us, not only through the creation, but by son (which has always been the case from the beginning) … who by, and through, we come to this reality of who we are, in relationship to God … that being said … to be a son is to always have been a son, which is the inexhaustible riches of the inheritance of who we are, that we have (as a present truth) being born of God.

Click to expand...

Is God's Love for us great enough for Him to do all He can to help us fulfill our objective?
We all start out as his children, Acts 17:
26 From one man he made all the nations, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and he marked out their appointed times in history and the boundaries of their lands. 27 God did this so that they would seek him and perhaps reach out for him and find him, though he is not far from any one of us. 28 ‘For in him we live and move and have our being.’[b] As some of your own poets have said, ‘We are his offspring.’[c]

29 “Therefore since we are God’s offspring, we should not think that the divine being is like gold or silver or stone—an image made by human design and skill. 30 In the past God overlooked such ignorance, but now he commands all people everywhere to repent. 31 For he has set a day when he will judge the world with justice by the man he has appointed. He has given proof of this to everyone by raising him from the dead.”

Jeff Saunders said:

Even in my days of teaching the western way of church, it always bothered me that a God of love, that I had encountered could burn his loved one forever, but all we had was the English translation to read, now with the internet we can look at the Greek words and how they were used 2000 years ago, now we can see that others in the early church used different definitions for some words and that is what made me convinced that God will not torture or annihilate His beloved creation, it goes against his nature and character.

Click to expand...

But the ancient church deemed UR as anathema. Do you want me to post their words again?

Jeff Saunders said:

Christian Universal Redemption is the only lense for me to read the Bible and make sense of the whole story, now I have questions but not nearly as many as before.

Click to expand...

Yes and that is what makes you teach error. Eternal is either eternal or not, God is either eternal, eternal punishment is either eternal or not. ‘Of the ages” does not work with all of these at the same time.

Jeff Saunders said:

Universal Restoration has never been condemned by the church counsels

Click to expand...

“If anyone says or thinks that the punishment of demons and impious men is only temporary, and will one day have an end, and that a restoration will take place of demons and impious men, let him be anathema.” Page 465 section IX.


It does not get any clearer. UR is anathema.

Jeff Saunders said:

There is debate about what you think happened.
The early church ecumenical councils did not explicitly condemn universal salvation (the belief that all will ultimately be saved) as a heresy in their official canons or decrees. However, the topic is complex, as certain theological positions related to universal salvation, particularly those associated with Origen and his teachings (often labeled "Origenism"), were debated and condemned in later councils.
Here’s a concise overview based on the historical record:

1. No Direct Condemnation in Early Ecumenical Councils:
   • The first seven ecumenical councils (e.g., Nicaea I in 325, Constantinople I in 381, Ephesus in 431, Chalcedon in 451) primarily focused on Christological and Trinitarian issues, such as defining the nature of Christ and the Trinity, rather than directly addressing universal salvation.
   • Universal salvation as a concept was not a central issue in these councils’ agendas, and their canons do not explicitly mention or condemn it.
2. Origen and the Second Council of Constantinople (553):
   • The Second Council of Constantinople (the fifth ecumenical council) is often cited in discussions of universal salvation because it condemned certain teachings associated with Origen, a 3rd-century theologian who speculated about the possibility of universal reconciliation (apokatastasis).
   • The council’s anathemas (condemnations) targeted specific Origenist doctrines, particularly those held by later followers who exaggerated or distorted Origen’s ideas. The first anathema condemns the idea of a pre-existent soul and related cosmological speculations but does not directly address universal salvation.
   • However, a set of 15 additional anathemas attributed to this council (possibly from a related synod) includes a condemnation of the idea that all will be restored to salvation, including demons and the damned. Scholars debate whether these anathemas were formally part of the ecumenical council or a separate local synod, as they were not universally ratified.
3. Historical Context:
   • Origen’s teachings on apokatastasis were controversial because they suggested that all beings, including Satan and demons, might eventually be reconciled to God. This clashed with emerging orthodox views on eternal punishment, as reflected in texts like Matthew 25:46.
   • While Origen himself was not formally condemned during his lifetime, later interpretations of his ideas (Origenism) were seen as problematic, especially by the 6th century when Justinian and others sought to unify Christian doctrine.
   • The condemnation of Origenist ideas in 553 was more about rejecting speculative cosmology and extreme interpretations than a direct ruling on universal salvation as understood today.
4. Later Developments:
   • The idea of universal salvation remained a minority view in Christian theology but was never universally condemned by an ecumenical council in a way that explicitly anathematized all forms of the belief. Some theologians, like Gregory of Nyssa, also held views sympathetic to universal reconciliation without facing formal condemnation.
   • The Western and Eastern churches developed stronger teachings on eternal punishment over time, particularly in response to later theological debates, but universal salvation was not a primary focus of ecumenical councils.

Conclusion: No early ecumenical council explicitly condemned universal salvation as a standalone doctrine. The closest related condemnation occurred at the Second Council of Constantinople (553), where certain Origenist teachings were anathematized, potentially including extreme forms of universalism. However, the precise scope and authority of these anathemas remain debated among historians and theologians. If you’d like, I can dig deeper into specific council texts or search for additional sources to clarify further!

4s

Click to expand...

There is always debate but the words of the council are clear.

bling said:

Is God's Love for us great enough for Him to do all He can to help us fulfill our objective?

Click to expand...

*There has never been a time where God was our adversary ... (a truth he purposed in himself, and like Love was himself (a truth hidden in christ who is hidden in God; a present truth of where all are (in him we move and have our being (no place where God is not) … by thought we turn him into this, much like the voice (in Adam’s mind) that was heard walking in a garden (as something separate from his own).

To expound a little bit on the wilderness (view/perception/glory) in relationship to this question (and to say things you already know) …

The patterns of truth laid out in the Bible directly relate to our soul and the process of coming to a consensus in ourselves (which has to do with our soul and where we have been brought to by God to see from, which becomes a way of thinking (mind of Christ) which is a journey happening in us (glory to glory/where we see ourselves/as opposed to a man that tills the ground/a beast of the field); in this we can only see what God allows us to see, which is the truth of all things God including repentance.

Most are caught between two mountains (a dialectic/an in the day (man’s day) you eat) , and to this (which begins with a tree and ends on a tree), like Noah and the end of all flesh (as a reflective inner truth) speaks to. Most wait for the glory of the Lord yet the whole earth is filled with it … which again is an inner truth to us, and the reality no less then where Jesus had spoken about where the kingdom of God was/is (or “behold now”).

The following directly speaks to our soul which is also the case with the two cities (throughout the Bible and specifically in the book of the Revelation of Jesus Christ) …

“Thus saith the LORD, Where is the bill of your mother's divorcement, whom I have put away? or which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves, and for your transgressions is your mother put away.” (The mother being referenced a city/mountain/virgin/bride (different views of the same singular truth (not a truth divided (into three parts) …

God has never been our adversary, … but most walkout a God of duality being caught in the narrative of the wilderness, where in their minds they wander between two mountains (which is not out of order), due to the fact the God they serve (like Elisha) is not their God, or a truth that springs out from them, or like Solomon’s “Drink waters out of thine own cistern, and running waters out of thine own well. “

*The sacrifice of an only son is a relational truth; it is the grounds for/of understanding.

It is the story of Adam, both the first and last of the mentality or one who tills the ground, or labors to bring forth (a son). The Bible (like the world) .”… if they should be written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written.”) barely scratches the surface of what is seen in the face of him who sits on the throne. I know for a fact that God can show you more in a moment then all those who ever lived can show you in a life time, but even that does not measure up to the inexhaustible riches that has been planted as a seed in the garden (which your soul is) of God.

Hentenza said:

“If anyone says or thinks that the punishment of demons and impious men is only temporary, and will one day have an end, and that a restoration will take place of demons and impious men, let him be anathema.” Page 465 section IX.

https://www.documentacatholicaomnia.eu/03d/0553-0553,_Concilium_Constantinopolitanum_II,_Documenta_Omnia_%5BSchaff%5D,_EN.pdf

It does not get any clearer. UR is anathema.

Click to expand...

Why will there be no remembrance of former things, to the extent that no place can be found for it ... is former things measured the same way eternal is, or as the word bottomless when referencing a pit ... or the words "sin no more" ... all such things are measured by us unless we choose not to eat, then it yields it's fruit like a stone that is cut out of a mountain without hands (in relationship to the son we have always been, the knowledge of who God (our Father) has along along known us to be) ... we have yet to even begin to understand the kingdom of God in relationship to us ... to live as he sees ... (whose sins we hold will be held ... but to our own determent ...)

Jeff Saunders said:

If creation is to bring about Gods glory, how does it bring God glory, if he knows that most of his creation he will have to burn forever, but he goes ahead and creates anyway knowing what the outcome will be. All the pain and suffering that people go through, wars, famine, slavery, human trafficking, and all the rest of this fallen world, and in the end, a small fraction of creation comes out good in the end, and people say that this if for Gods glory?
Now what if Jesus was really the savior of the cosmos as John 4:42 says and what if God was really reconciling the world to himself not counting mens trespasses against them, 2 Cor 5:19 but the scripture that says where sin abounds mercy abounds even more.Rom 5:20. Now if Gods plan was to have a creation that would love him out of free will and the last 6000 years and till the end, were Gods way of bringing about the result that all his creation would worship him out of free will and in the end God will be all in all 1 Cor 15:28. Sin and death are no more, not just stuck in a place that God has to keep going forever and listen to the screams of his people for all eternity, what if God in the end would make a new heaven and new earth and the old is done and all is new, his whole creation living in him out of free will love, no more sin and death its gone forever.
I ask you how does God losing most of his creation and then having to burn it forever bring glory to God?
Does not the idea that God knew what he was doing, and had a plan, and had all that it would take to accomplish the plan, to bring all his creation into a love with him, forever and sin and death are no more, and God will be all in all. Does this not bring more glory to God?

Click to expand...

If everything unworthy in God's presence is burned regardless of how pristine or soiled it is then the question needs to change about how we can be transformed to a substance that thrives in fire rather than one that is destroyed in it. The glory of God is all consuming, whether you are ready for it or not.

bling said:

You start out with Eph. 3:10 suggesting this is “God’s purpose”. Reading the context we find:

Eph. 3: 7 I became a servant of this gospel by the gift of God’s grace given me through the working of his power. 8 Although I am less than the least of all the Lord’s people, this grace was given me: to preach to the Gentiles the boundless riches of Christ, 9 and to make plain to everyone the administration of this mystery, which for ages past was kept hidden in God, who created all things. 10 His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, 11 according to his eternal purpose that he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord. 12 In him and through faith in him we may approach God with freedom and confidence. 13 I ask you, therefore, not to be discouraged because of my sufferings for you, which are your glory.

First off: The fallen angels are not the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realm.

Why would God need to go through all this to “help” hell bound angels?

There would be powerful good beings in heaven wondering why Gentiles were treated so differently from Jews prior to the cross and so replacing the Jewish nation with the Church we have the unity desired, the mystery is made known.

The “intent of the Church”, does not equal God’s overall purpose.

You might want to read my post 23.

We are not being “Tested” but are here to obtain and use a purely charitable undeserved gift, which must be humbly accepted of our own free will as charity.

We have the privilege and honor of being part of God’s work (allowing the Spirit to work through us) to bring others to Christ, so they can make an informed choice. We are in the presence with God when He is glorified and share in His glory that way.

Click to expand...

I never said God helps hellbound angels. He does demonstrate His wisdom to them in what I assume to be a sort of in their face judgement. I dont say it is God's only purpose but the whole plan, the mystery in context was so grand, and i am sure jaw-dropping to the fallen angels. Just as the magnificent plan God had to bring Jesus as a man to restore mankind to our elevated status as children if God. You are correct it is an amazing gift.

Richard T said:

I never said God helps hellbound angels. He does demonstrate His wisdom to them in what I assume to be a sort of in their face judgement. I dont say it is God's only purpose but the whole plan, the mystery in context was so grand, and i am sure jaw-dropping to the fallen angels. Just as the magnificent plan God had to bring Jesus as a man to restore mankind to our elevated status as children if God. You are correct it is an amazing gift.

Click to expand...

OK, I do have an issue with this idea , you said:

“God had to bring Jesus as a man to restore mankind to our elevated status as children if God.”

Man is not being “restored”, since Adam and Eve were far short of being Christ like, even though they were made “vey good”.

We do not want to go back to the way Adam and Eve were even prior to sinning, since with the way they were they sinned, we want something much better.

Adam and Eve prior to sinning lacked something which God could not provide instinctively in them, it had to come as the result of a free will choice on their part with likely alternatives to make it a real choice.

bling said:

OK, I do have an issue with this idea , you said:

“God had to bring Jesus as a man to restore mankind to our elevated status as children if God.”

Man is not being “restored”, since Adam and Eve were far short of being Christ like, even though they were made “vey good”.

We do not want to go back to the way Adam and Eve were even prior to sinning, since with the way they were they sinned, we want something much better.

Adam and Eve prior to sinning lacked something which God could not provide instinctively in them, it had to come as the result of a free will choice on their part with likely alternatives to make it a real choice.

Click to expand...

Yes, i agree with that. The elevated status we have aa children bought by the blood is far above anythin adam and eve had.