Majority in Heaven?

Discussion in 'Fundamental Baptist Forum' started by TCGreek, May 19, 2007.

  1. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    A few weeks ago, I was reading an article by Charles Spurgeon, in which he says that the majority of people will be in heaven. Has anyone else read that article? How does Spurgeon's view square with what Jesus says in Matt. 7:13, 14?
     
  2. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    can you reference which article you read that in?
     
  3. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    While I disagree with the contention that most people will be in heaven (or most people will be saved, or however you want to word "being in the family of God"), Matthew 7:13-14 is part of the Sermon on the Mount, which is directed at people who are not already in the family, but to disciples; those who are not only in the family, but embrace his teachings.

    It has nothing to do with getting into the family. It has to do with "destruction".
     
  4. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    The article is: "A Defense of Calvinism."
     
  5. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    At the end of the sermon on the Mount, the people, not just the disciples were amazed at his teachins (7:28, 290.

    Furthermore, the conclusion to this sermon would be totally irrelevant to people who have already "embrace his teachings" (Matt. 7:24-27).

    I original wrote about heaven not family. What do you mean by family? Besides, 2 Thess. 1:6-12 talks about "eternal destruction" for those on the broad path and Christ to be glorified in his saints at His Parousia.
     
  6. bapmom

    bapmom
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know if I agree with Spurgeon or not on that point....of course he was speaking merely as to his opinion....and he was counting all the multitudes of babies who have died before understanding the law. I guess I could see why he'd hold that opinion.

    But it is just his opinion.....
     
  7. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    "Throngs" or "multitudes" would be better than simply "people". Jesus had many, many disciples. In the Garden, when the soldiers came to take him, there was a tenth of a legion. Probably between 500 and 600 soldiers (although possible as few as 200 and possibly as many as 1000, although both ends of the extremes were rare).

    Why do you suppose that it took that many soldiers?

    (Technically, since he went voluntarily, it didn't "take that many soldiers", but the authorities felt it necessary, so that's the thrust of my question.)

    He had a lot of disciples.

    When I was first learning how to make stained glass windows, I "discipled" myself to a man from Miami named Bob. I visited him a couple of years ago, and he "astonished" me by showing me something that I didn't know. (I also "astonished" him by showing him something that he had not come across in his 30 years in the business, but that's not applicable here, as I don't think Jesus would have been astonished by any teaching of one of his disciples.)

    I already knew how to make beautiful stained glass windows. Yet, he still astonished me with something that I didn't know.

    By the same token, salvation has always been through faith. Yet, these disciples were astonished by things that were being taught that the religious leaders either didn't know or hid intentionally.

    Why do you think that a disciple, who embraced his teachings knew everything?

    Why do you think that when he taught some hard things that many of his disciples went back and "walked no more with him" as we're told in John 6:66?

    BTW, 2 Thessalonians 1:9 has a completely different word. "Destruction" is more of an extermination. Matthew 7:13 has "apOleian"; 2 Thessalonians 1:9 has "olethron".

    As to "family", I'm referring to those who have been born from above. They're in the family. Saved forever.
     
  8. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    I see no reason to include the crowd as the disciples of Jesus when Matthew makes a difference ("When Jesus say the crowds, He went up on the mountain; and after He sat down, His disciples came to Him, 5:1, NASB).

    Further, at the end of his discourse, the crowds who were amazed clearly is not the disciples of Jesus at this point, because Matthew adds this, "For He was teaching them as one having authority, and not as their scribes" (7:29, the crowds were still loyal to "their scribes.").

    Yes Matthew uses apoleia and Paul olethros, but that does not mean they are teaching something else completely. You must demonstrate that by the use of two different Greek terms that two doctrines are here in view.

    I believe in analogia scriptura. With that in mind, I do not know what you mean by "extermination." But apoleia is used in Rev 17:8, 11 in reference to the beast cannot mean "extermination" as defined by Webster (the ridding of something completely"), because the same beast is mention in Rev 20:10 in this way: "And the devil who deceived them was thrown intot he lake of fire and brimstone, where the beast and the false prophet are also; and they will be tormented day and night forever" (emphasis added).

    Consider this, not because two different Greek words are used mean that they are saying something totally different. In Mark 2:11 we have the word "mat" (to krabbaton), but Luke uses a different Greek word (to klinidion) in same telling of the same story. They both are referring to the same thing, but with the use of two different words, synonyms. We do that all the time in English.
     
  9. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    Either I mistyped or you misread or I simply was not clear, but my intent was the opposite of what you say here. "Apoleia" is "perish", not "olethron", which is better stated as "extermination". Two different words translated by the same English word, but with slightly different meanings.

    "ApOleia" is the destruction that one causes or that one experiences. "Olethron" is the state of destruction always with some kind of transcendent coloring or the act of destruction itself.

    Are a sofa and a couch the same thing in English? No, they are two similar, but different things. A sofa is a kind of couch, but a couch encompasses much more. A sofa is "a long, upholstered couch with a back and two arms or raised ends." A couch is "1.a piece of furniture for seating from two to four people, typically in the form of a bench with a back, sometimes having an armrest at one or each end, and partly or wholly upholstered and often fitted with springs, tailored cushions, skirts, etc.; sofa. 2.a similar article of furniture, with a headrest at one end, on which some patients of psychiatrists or psychoanalysts lie while undergoing treatment."

    By the same token, the bed in both verses is a bed, but with a different emphasis in the two passages. In Mark's writing, it's a poor man's bed. In Luke's, it's simply a small bed or pallet. One puts the emphasis on the poor aspect of it, the other doesn't.

    It God considers it important, so do I. I don't think he used words frivolously.

    As an aside, since I've been talking about etymology on other threads, "sofa" was first written in English in 1625 and meant "raised section of a floor, covered with carpets and cushions." 1717 was the first time that it was recorded as a lond, stuffed seat. "Sofa" is Turkish, which got it from the Arabic "suffah".

    "Couch", OTOH, is specifically different from a "sofa" etymologically. "1340, from O.Fr. couche "a bed, lair," from coucher "to lie down," from L. collocare (see couch (v.)). Traditionally, a couch has the head end only raised, and only half a back; a sofa has both ends raised and a full back; a settee is like a sofa but may be without arms; an ottoman has neither back nor arms, nor has a divan, the distinctive feature of which is that it goes against a wall.
     
  10. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    According to THE ALMANAC OF THE CHRISITAN WORLD
    1991-1992 Edition (Tyndal House, 1990) page 502:

    35,000 Million persons were born 33AD - 1990AD
    13,000 Million were evangelized (38%)
    8,000 Million were Christians (24%)

    according to a survey I conduced here on
    BB, the average # of real Christians was
    180 Million.

    Here is my computation:

    Here is the view when the Church Age Elect
    Saints are gathered together in heaven
    right after the Pretribulation
    Rev 7:9 (KJV1611 Edition):
    After this I beheld, and lo, a great multitude,
    which no man could nuber
    ,
    of all nations, and kindreds, and people, & tongues,
    stood before the throne, & before the Lamb,
    clothed with white robes, and palmes in their hands:


    A count of 200 Million is mentioned in Revelation
    as well as the uncountable number. Isn't it reasonable
    to assume that the 'uncountable number' is MORE
    than the countable number: 200 Million?
    Of course it is.

    IMHO 'few' can mean anything from 1 in a million to 49%.
     
  11. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    It doesn't. And contrary to what the Kingdom Theology teaches Matt 7:13,14 is speaking of being saved eternally. If this is what Spurgeon said then he was wrong. As scripture indicates.
     
  12. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    You may hold to a salvation of works, but Scriptures don't.
     
  13. ktn4eg

    ktn4eg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2004
    Messages:
    3,517
    Likes Received:
    1
    Not sure who it was that came up with this observation, but I'm sure there is much truth to it:

    "When we enter eternity, we will probably be surprised in two ways--
    1. Surprised at who we will see there, and
    2. Surprised at who we do not see there!"

    As to who (and how many) will be in either category, I'll leave that up to the Lord. I'm just glad that my eternal destiny was settled a little over 41 years ago when I received Christ as my Savior!!

    I'll also be glad to see my BB friends there too--even the ones with whom I may disagree with on some issues.

    You are still my brothers and sisters in Christ, and I love y'all with the love of the Lord!

    God bless all of you!
     
  14. J. Jump

    J. Jump
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Eternal salvation is based on faith in the substitutionary death and shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, yet Christ very rarely talks about His death in the gospel accounts, and when He does the disciples don't believe Him and or understand what He's talking about, yet modern-day Christendom wants us to believe that the Gopsel accounts are preaching the message of eternal salvation, when the disciples - THE DISCIPLES didn't even really believe He was even going to die, much less understand the reason behind His death until well after His resurrection.

    Matthew 7 is not regarding eternal salvation. Very little is said about eternal salvation in the gospels, because that is not the message being presented. Christ specifically tells us what message is being proclaimed and that is the message of the kingdom. If the message of the kingdom is the same message as salvation by grace through faith then I guess salvation is only a 1,000 years long. Wonder what will happen to us after that?
     
  15. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0

    The credit, cause, or reason for salvtion (which is only eternal) begins and ends with the one who has the power and authority to give salvation. It does not matter what response we are required by God to have. Any such response whether it be to have faith, repentence, or even Batism is not relevent to the credit for salvation.

    God and God alone gets all the credit and glory for salvation even though he requires a response from us out of the ability to choose him that he has given us. All this works based salvation arguments ignores John 1:12,13
     
  16. 2 Timothy2:1-4

    2 Timothy2:1-4
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,879
    Likes Received:
    0
    This is irrelevent to whether or not Jesus is talking about eternal salvation which is the only salvation. The lack of understanding has no bearing on Christs' message and in no way gives evidence of this mythical kingdom salvation.

    You fail to make a case for this mythical kingdom salvation.
     
  17. J. Jump

    J. Jump
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well you continue to believe that if you want to. It's certainly not my job to convince anyone otherwise. But you certainly haven't put forth anything credible to discount it, so I'll go with Scripture over you if you don't mind :laugh: :wavey:.

    Here is a saying that I found on a website and I think I may adopt it as my signature, and I think it is relevant to your two statements.

    Truth is true -even if no one knows it.
    Truth is true -even if no one admits it.
    Truth is true -even if no one agrees what it is.
    Truth is true -even if no one follows it.
    Truth is true -even if no one but God grasps it fully.


    If the gospel of the kingdom is so untrue, then why is it that anytime you post all you can say is no its not. Do you really expect people to believe you just because you say so? If I'm not mistaken you are a pastor. So do you expect your flock to follow you just because you say something is true.

    If someone is struggling with something and asks you something or better yet shares something with you that you disagree with is that your response to them "no it's not." "You haven't made a cast for that."

    It's unbelievable that the clear message of the gospel of grace through faith apart from works is the death and shed blood of Jesus Christ as The Substitute and yet none of the disciples believed that message and yet you say the gospel accounts are still about eternal salvation.

    Just re-read your statement here. Are you serious?
     
  18. Ed Edwards

    Ed Edwards
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/Ed.gif>

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2002
    Messages:
    15,715
    Likes Received:
    0
    Oh, come on, there are three kingdoms and you are
    saved to all three of them:

    1. The Millinnial Messanic Kingdom of Christ
    2. The KINGDOM WITH YOU NOW Kingdom of the Holy Spirit
    3. The eternal, in heaven, Kingdom of God
     
  19. J. Jump

    J. Jump
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2004
    Messages:
    4,108
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well most of Christendom would have us believe that once we are eternally saved the MK is part of a package deal, but Scripture teaches otherwise.

    As to No. 3 we are only going to be in heaven for a period of time (not sure how long exactly). We will not spend eternity in heaven. That is a man-made church tradition. Scripture tells us that God's throne won't even reside in heaven for all eternity, but rather will dwell on the earth amongst His people.
     
  20. TCGreek

    TCGreek
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 12, 2006
    Messages:
    7,373
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hope of Glory, you still have not demonstrated from Scripture that apoleia and olethros are conveying to different meaning altogether. Thanks for your etymological tour.

    I believe that both Jesus and Paul are referencing the same group of people, even though different Greek terms are used: those on the path of destruction (apoleia) will suffer eternal destruction (olethro) from the presence of the Lord's coming.

    I concur that krabatton is the poor man's bed, but I see no difference in meaning, though different terms are used by the other Gospel writers.
     
    #20 TCGreek, May 19, 2007
    Last edited by a moderator: May 19, 2007

Share This Page

Loading...