How Many People Will Go To Heaven?

[Bsix]

Feel free not to offer a speculative guess.

The reason I am asking the question is because I suspect that there is a degree of unintentional (perhaps even intentional) deception in how some traditional Christians describe the ease and free-ness of salvation.

There is criticism toward those who believe that faith and works combine to become the elements of salvation through Christ.

These folks often advertise salvation as a free gift...you don't have to do anything...all you have to do is accept. Yet, I suspect that there is virtually nothing harder than actually accepting this free...no obligation gift.

If believers actually shared how few are able to accept the gift, the difficulty and exclusiveness would be exposed.

Mormonism has almost all of humanity going to heaven. Traditional Christians have almost everyone going to hell (if I understand the teachings correctly)

Those who believe in election favor a system that has and even greater number of people going to hell -- so it seems to me.

If the vast majority of humankind can't or won't be able to accept this free gift, it is misleading to suggest that it is a uniquely different or easier system of salvation that one that involves works.

Regards,

Six

[rhinomelon]

Mormonism has almost all of humanity going to heaven. Traditional Christians have almost everyone going to hell (if I understand the teachings correctly)

Those who believe in election favor a system that has and even greater number of people going to hell -- so it seems to me.

If the vast majority of humankind can't or won't be able to accept this free gift, it is misleading to suggest that it is a uniquely different or easier system of salvation that one that involves works.

Ha! I knew it...

Anyway, I wouldn't say that the problem is that human beings can't or won't be able to accept the gift; it's that many human beings simply won't. They choose not to. You seem to be operating under the assumption that humanity is basically good, and wants to choose God over everything else. Experience, not to mention Scripture, points in the opposite direction. Simply having faith and believing in Christ is hard enough; why add more to the pile?

So, is my exclusivism now exposed? I was unaware that it was hidden to begin with! I agree that having faith is difficult, and I would go further and say that many people will choose not to believe (as to specific percentages, I have no idea). But the difficulty of having faith does not make it any less free, any less of a gift of God's grace. Heck, it's only by God's grace that it is possible in the first place!

Can I get an amen from the mainstream Christians out there?

Take care, everyone

[Bsix]

Anyway, I wouldn't say that the problem is that human beings can't or won't be able to accept the gift; it's that many human beings simply won't.

Six: I understand election...at least the reformist version of it...there is no "won't." If you are pre-selected for salvation you will be forced to accept the Lord and be saved. If you aren't pre-selected, you simply cannot under any circumstances choose to accept the gift that Jesus is supposedly offering you for free. Why? Because, as I understand it, you are too depraved to accept even if you wanted...God created you that way and doesn't want you.

In fact, the free gift of salvation isn't really even offered to you because Jesus did not atone for your sins if you are not pre-selected for salvation. I believe that is the core of the 'limited-atonement' doctrine held to by many electionists.

To me, this is not a free-gift system. This seems to be a salvation system that consigns the vast majority of humankind to an eternity burning in hell. And, this majority is never offered the advertised free gift. And, those who are lucky enough to be pre-selected are forced to accept the gift.

It is my impression, as stated in my second post on this thread, that under the traditional Christian system, only about one in ten will be saved. The rest go to hell.

Regards,

Six

[rhinomelon]

Rarely have I seen so many ignorant caricatures in a single post. I don't even know where to begin. So I won't! Have fun with your odd opinions. Perhaps someone with more patience and interest than I will respond to your claims. I've got other, more important fish to fry.

But for one basic point, I would hardly call most mainstream Christians Calvinists, as you seem to assume. There, I responded to one point.

Take care, everyone

[Hammer]

Ha! I knew it...

Anyway, I wouldn't say that the problem is that human beings can't or won't be able to accept the gift; it's that many human beings simply won't. They choose not to. You seem to be operating under the assumption that humanity is basically good, and wants to choose God over everything else. Experience, not to mention Scripture, points in the opposite direction. Simply having faith and believing in Christ is hard enough; why add more to the pile?

So, is my exclusivism now exposed? I was unaware that it was hidden to begin with! I agree that having faith is difficult, and I would go further and say that many people will choose not to believe (as to specific percentages, I have no idea). But the difficulty of having faith does not make it any less free, any less of a gift of God's grace. Heck, it's only by God's grace that it is possible in the first place!

Can I get an amen from the mainstream Christians out there?

Take care, everyone

It seems that the truth of the matter bothers you.

[rhinomelon]

It seems that the truth of the matter bothers you.

Yes. It is true that even LDS can resort to mischaracterizations and inflammatory caricatures in order to "one-up" their mainstream Christian "enemies". The truth that LDS get a pass in this behavior while still trying to hold the rabid anti-crowd over the head of all Christendom does indeed bother me.

Other than that truth, I remain unbothered.

Take care, everyone

[HiJolly]

Thinking about this I have come to the conclussion that 144,000 represents symbolically ALL.

I agree. 12 x 12 x 1000 is significant.

HiJolly

[Bsix]

Rarely have I seen so many ignorant caricatures in a single post.

Six: I clearly stated in my post that I am describing Calvinist election as I understand it. If I am in error, please feel free to correct my misunderstanding. The heart of Calvinism is the famous T.U.L.I.P. Unless you claim that this description from Calvinists themselves is inaccurate, I think that a lot of my summaries are correct.

According to this website by Matt Slick, The Five Points of Calvinism the doctrines are:

Total Depravity:

Sin has affected all parts of man. The heart, emotions, will, mind, and body are all affected by sin. We are completely sinful. We are not as sinful as we could be, but we are completely affected by sin.

The doctrine of Total Depravity is derived from scriptures that reveal human character: Manâ??s heart is evil (Mark 7:21-23) and sick (Jer. 17:9). Man is a slave of sin (Rom. 6:20). He does not seek for God (Rom. 3:10-12). He cannot understand spiritual things (1 Cor. 2:14). He is at enmity with God (Eph. 2:15). And, is by nature a child of wrath (Eph. 2:3). The Calvinist asks the question, "In light of the scriptures that declare manâ??s true nature as being utterly lost and incapable, how is it possible for anyone to choose or desire God?" The answer is, "He cannot. Therefore God must predestine."

Calvinism also maintains that because of our fallen nature we are born again not by our own will but Godâ??s will (John 1:12-13); God grants that we believe (Phil. 1:29); faith is the work of God (John 6:28-29); God appoints people to believe (Acts 13:48); and God predestines (Eph. 1:1-11; Rom. 8:29; 9:9-23).

Six: So...how am I misrepresenting the notion that the free-gift is not really something that people are empowered to accept? How have I made an ignorant characterization about Calvinistic doctrine?

Unconditional Election:

God does not base His election on anything He sees in the individual. He chooses the elect according to the kind intention of His will (Eph. 1:4-8; Rom. 9:11) without any consideration of merit within the individual. Nor does God look into the future to see who would pick Him. Also, as some are elected into salvation, others are not (Rom. 9:15, 21).

Six: Again, how have I ignorantly characterized this doctrine? I correctly stated that some are pre-selected for salvation and some are not. My comment seems to be based on solid Calvinist teachings.

Limited Atonement:

Jesus died only for the elect. Though Jesusâ?? sacrifice was sufficient for all, it was not efficacious for all. Jesus only bore the sins of the elect. Support for this position is drawn from such scriptures as Matt. 26:28 where Jesus died for â??many'; John 10:11, 15 which say that Jesus died for the sheep (not the goats, per Matt. 25:32-33); John 17:9 where Jesus in prayer interceded for the ones given Him, not those of the entire world; Acts 20:28 and Eph. 5:25-27 which state that the Church was purchased by Christ, not all people; and Isaiah 53:12 which is a prophecy of Jesusâ?? crucifixion where he would bore the sins of many (not all).

Six: Again, I ask you to show me how I have ignorantly characterized Calvinist doctrine. It is clear, under this system of belief, Jesus did NOT die for all. He only bore the sins of the pre-selected elect.

Irresistible Grace:

When God calls his elect into salvation, they cannot resist. God offers to all people the gospel message. This is called the external call. But to the elect, God extends an internal call and it cannot be resisted. This call is by the Holy Spirit who works in the hearts and minds of the elect to bring them to repentance and regeneration whereby they willingly and freely come to God. Some of the verses used in support of this teaching are Romans 9:16 where it says that "it is not of him who wills nor of him who runs, but of God who has mercy"; Philippians 2:12-13 where God is said to be the one working salvation in the individual; John 6:28-29 where faith is declared to be the work of God; Acts 13:48 where God appoints people to believe; and John 1:12-13 where being born again is not by manâ??s will, but by Godâ??s.

Six: Please show me how I have ignorantly characterized Calvinist doctrine. It is clear that the elect are called and cannot resist. God makes the pre-selected accept the Gospel. I am not making this stuff up.

Perseverance of the Saints:

You cannot lose your salvation. Because the Father has elected, the Son has redeemed, and the Holy Spirit has applied salvation, those thus saved are eternally secure. They are eternally secure in Christ. Some of the verses for this position are John 10:27-28 where Jesus said His sheep will never perish; John 6:47 where salvation is described as everlasting life; Romans 8:1 where it is said we have passed out of judgment; 1 Corinthians 10:13 where God promises to never let us be tempted beyond what we can handle; and Phil. 1:6 where God is the one being faithful to perfect us until the day of Jesusâ?? return.

Six: Obviously, I made no ingnorant characterization on this subject because I did not adress eternal security.

I don't even know where to begin. So I won't! Have fun with your odd opinions. Perhaps someone with more patience and interest than I will respond to your claims. I've got other, more important fish to fry.

Six: Cut and run if you wish. I have stated pure straight-up Calvinist doctrine. If you aren't a Calvinist, I would not expect you to defend them. However, it think that any ignorant or odd characterizations are the manner in which my comments have been misrepresented.

But for one basic point, I would hardly call most mainstream Christians Calvinists, as you seem to assume. There, I responded to one point.

Six: I never suggested that Calvinists represent the majority of traditional Christians.

Regards,

Six

[Bsix]

I'll invite any of our TULIP friends to comment on my speculative guess as to the number of people going to heaven under the Calvinist plan of salvation.

Also, feel free to point out any misunderstandings I may have about the five points of Calvinism.

Regards,

Six

[paulhadik]

Bsix:

rhino is right. My main objection to this board is that most of the threads are "look what they are saying about us, why do they do this when we don't do it to anyone else????" while the rest of the threads are

"you are forced to be saved" "you are too depraved and God doesn't want you"

type of mischaracterizations of what some of us take as seriously as you take the idea of "God doesn't care how bad you are y'all get to heaven in LDS teachings" or something like that...

[paulhadik]

Bsix:

As a believer in scripture based reformed theology I am fairly close to a "calvinist" whatever that means.

Not real sure what you are asking when you say "speculative guess"..isn't that guessing at a guess???

We've already stated we don't know. I am sorry that this isn't the "not very many" that you want us to say

is there anything else that we can do to help you though? Would you like on of our "I am not perfect, just elected" T-shirts?

[Bsix]

rhino is right. My main objection to this board is that most of the threads are "look what they are saying about us, why do they do this when we don't do it to anyone else????" while the rest of the threads are "you are forced to be saved" "you are too depraved and God doesn't want you" type of mischaracterizations of what some of us take as seriously as you take the idea of "God doesn't care how bad you are y'all to get heaven in LDS teachings" or something like that...

Six: I will concede that if I am guilty of anything, it is stating Calvinistic beliefs in a rather blunt manner. However, am I not accurate in my statement of facts? And, did I not state facts in relation to a thread devoted to comparative religion.

If you are not pre-selected for salvation (elected) doesn't that mean that God does not want you? If he did, he wouldn't have elected you? And, you are too depraved to accept the Gospel on your own power? Isn't that pretty basic 5-point's doctrine? Remember, "deparavity" is not my word...it is the language used by Calvinists themselves.

Also, isn't the concept of irresistible grace that those who are elect will be compelled to accept the Gospel and be saved...no matter how depraved they are? Isn't that basic 5-point's doctrine?

I'll also suggest that there is a very wide gap between blunt observations versus the entire attack-oriented industry.

If the worst the traditional Christian's engaged in are statements like: "God doesn't care how bad you are y'all to get heaven in LDS teachings" there would be very little to comment about. After all, that is pretty close to a completely fair point.

However Paul, you and I know that Evangelical countercultism goes far, far beyond pithy and blunt commentary.

Regards,

Six

[kantgomo]

We're told in Scripture that because of person's stubbornness and unrepentant heart, they store up wrath against themselves. God has given man the capacity to understand that He indeed exists, but men reject Him and reject truth. We are also told that He desires persons to not perish and to come to repentance. A god who is not sovereign cannot be God.

[Ray Callis Hatton III]

I am LDS, and believe all have the opportunity to enter any kingdom they desire, in this life or the next.

I think that most Christians don't entertain the possibility of the unevagelized being able to be saved. The doctrine of limited atonement of Augustine and Calvin affirms that Christ did not die for all human beings but merely for a select few whose salvation was predestined before the foundations of the earth by and through God's sovereign will. They say we have no need to worry about the salvation of other people, the Indian begger and Chinese rice farmer who never heard of Christ, are he was simply not "chosen." Also, there is also the concept of "Original Sin" (by Catholics) that requires baptism for the remission of sins to erase the "original sin of Adam", and went to extremes as baptizing new born babies because they believed humans are automatically tainted by sin, and are damned by default, and it is by chance that people get baptized to be saved.

Given the immense scriptural witness of God's perfect love, many Christians, including Latter-day Saints, find such doctrines of limited atonement totally unpersuasive. Rather, though people are ignorant of the law, through the "Light of Christ," God enlightens the entire human family, making them; inclined to believe in a divine reality, enabled to distinguish good from evil, and a disposition to choose rightly. While this universal knowledge is not sufficient to obtain all righteousness nor salvation, righteousness and salvation is viewed as a gradual step-by-step process, and that light cleaves unto greater light (D&C 88:40). The ignorant humans will one day be in a position where they can be reconciled to God, and if not, our views of hell is not as "endless" as the terms that are used, lead some to believe. With the belief of postmortem evangelization before the final judgment and of proxy baptism for the dead, and other resources that enables the dead to fulfill the ends of the law, and may enter the Celestial Kingdom. So the Latter-day Saints, if compared to other Christians, one would expect the number to be greater since its universally accessible. Though, like C. S. Lewis, Latter-day Saints allow for the possibility that there may be those that will be "rebels to the end." So, I don't really know if the Latter-day Saint heaven will have more people as opposed to traditional Christianity.

[gaucho]

My theory on this subject has changed over the years. While I used to believe the Celestial Kingdom would be home to very few of our father's children, I now believe the opposite. I think the majority, if not the vast majority of all spirits who kept their first estate will end up eventually in the CK. My opinion is changing based on a greater understanding of the Atonement and of the ability of men to repent. Also, I believe that it won't be a Heaven if you are not surrounded by your family.

Thus, i feel there is a process where those who qualify will be able to help those who fell short to eventually reach the CK. For example, suppose you make the CK but your spouse does not and neither do some of your children. Is this really going to be a place of Eternal joy for you if your loved ones are not there? Call it what you want, but if I'm in the CK and my wife and kids are not, there is no Heaven for me. There is going to be a way.....perhaps one that takes considerable time, but nonetheless a way to bring your loved ones up with you. Or, perhaps you fell short and your loved ones will help you qualify. Unless you totally reject the Saviour and remain defiant, I thing the atonement can work for all of us. And I'm not referring to one of the lower kingdoms.

[paulhadik]

They say we have no need to worry about the salvation of other people, the Indian begger and Chinese rice farmer who never heard of Christ, are he was simply not "chosen."

long drawn out siiiigggghhhhhh......

[Bsix]

They say we have no need to worry about the salvation of other people, the Indian begger and Chinese rice farmer who never heard of Christ, are he was simply not "chosen."

Six: I've heard this notion expressed a several of different ways.

-- Yes, I have often heard some Calvinists bluntly and coldly shrug their shoulders and say if someone is not elect...that is just the way it is.

-- I believe that most Calvinists take the stance that they do not know who is elect, so they act as if everyone is elect and witness to them with fervor. (However, this does not apply to anyone who lives in a circumstance where it is not possible for them to ever hear of Christ.)

-- And, I have heard some claim that God is a fair God and that if someone is elect, they will be saved even they never hear the Gospel and accept Jesus Christ. (I have never been able to figure out how that is supposed to work...it is so at odds with a host of other traditional Christian theologies.)

All this ties back to the original theme of the thread...what percentage will go to Heaven. There are those who refuse to speculate. Now I don't know, but some belief systems are going to result in hardly anyone going to heaven. It is a hard thing to tell others that only a very small number -- those who are elect -- will go to heaven.

For me personally, one of the contributing reasons I left traditional Christianity was the harshness with which the damned were thought of. Perhaps it was a regional/era thing, but down South where I spent some of my teen years, the Protestants were really quite blunt about who was going to hell and the righteous who were saved. I suppose we live in more polite times.

Six

[rhinomelon]

Now I don't know, but some belief systems are going to result in hardly anyone going to heaven. It is a hard thing to tell others that only a very small number -- those who are elect -- will go to heaven.

What makes you think that the doctrine of election automatically means that only a "very small number" will go to heaven? Are you suggesting that simply believing in election means that one also believes God will only elect a very small number? It's statements like these that make it difficult to take your argument seriously, since the bias is overwhelming.

Take care, everyone

[Bud]

LDS - as previously stated 99.9999% will make it to heaven. I do disagree with most so far about the CK, I would say its closer to 5 - 10 % but thats just an opinion - not based on anything I have seen in scripture. Observing those that actually walk the walk.

I agree.

[Bsix]

What makes you think that the doctrine of election automatically means that only a "very small number" will go to heaven? Are you suggesting that simply believing in election means that one also believes God will only elect a very small number? It's statements like these that make it difficult to take your argument seriously, since the bias is overwhelming.

Six: From everything I have ever learned or heard about the "elect" system, it is exclusive and limited.

If I understand the doctrine correctly, only those who accept Christ will be saved. Everyone else will be damned. Unless this can be disputed, this automatically results in the majority of humankind being damned. Consider:

-- Children who die without accepting Jesus Christ. Historically, that is as much as half of humankind. I have personally heard Calvinist preachers declare that babies who die go to hell.

-- All the people throughout history who have lived in a time or place where the Gospel of Jesus Christ is not know. This is really the vast majority of humankind.

-- The relatively small number of people who can/do hear the Gospel who do not accept. It is a fact that in our information age, only a minority of people accept the Gospel. As a Mormon, I also know that first hand that it isn't enough to accept the Gospel...it is that people have to accept the RIGHT Gospel doctrine. This narrows the field even more.

Add all that up...you get only a few of the select going to Heaven.

If you think I am wrong, then provide your opinion of how many humans are Heaven bound...and provide the logic. Surely a believer can offer better rationals and supports for their belief system than I.

Regards,

Six

[rhinomelon]

It's pointless speculation, on both sides of the issue. I find it interesting that you are pressuring mainstream Christians to make eternal judgments on individuals we've never met, when that is one of the things that LDS decry so vociferously about mainstream Christians. Trying to force our feet into the "anti" shoe, are you?

The only possible correct answer has already been given and echoed by several mainstream Christians. I couldn't really care less about whether that satisfies you or not.

Take care, everyone

[John Williams]

It's pointless speculation, on both sides of the issue. I find it interesting that you are pressuring mainstream Christians to make eternal judgments on individuals we've never met, when that is one of the things that LDS decry so vociferously about mainstream Christians. Trying to force our feet into the "anti" shoe, are you?

The only possible correct answer has already been given and echoed by several mainstream Christians. I couldn't really care less about whether that satisfies you or not.

Take care, everyone

I think the proper question is whether you or I will go to heaven. What does it take and have I qualified are the two big issues.

As for me, I don't think I'll end up there.

[Bill “Papa” Lee]

144,000.

I said it first!

I hate when that happens...Quick question...if you are JW and you were one of the "144,000" and you bring someone into the church are you possibably unseating yourself?

Pa Pa

[kantgomo]

.... As a Mormon, I also know that first hand that it isn't enough to accept the Gospel...it is that people have to accept the RIGHT Gospel doctrine. This narrows the field even more........

Regards,

Six

I say this respectfully.. Just how good do persons think they are that they can keep a bunch of rules to the letter and please God so much as to redeem and reconcile themselves to God? Persons need to their eyes. There is only One way for a person to be reconciled to God. That one way is the stumbling block for many. It is outright rebellion and/or love of self to stumble over Jesus.

[jadams_4242]

I hate when that happens...Quick question...if you are JW and you were one of the "144,000" and you bring someone into the church are you possibably unseating yourself?

Pa Pa

I always have thought this 144,000 to be tied into the twelve tribes of israel 12 times 12 = 144, So when

figuring in all the differant matmatical possibilities and possible combinations, then actually understanding

what God meant, this is a very perplexing issue!