Gates of hell question

[Fredricks]

NOT TO ARGUE JUST CLARIFY
I am actually working on a bigger post but need clarification of what Catholicism’s official doctrine is on “the gates of hell shall not prevail”.

*And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it*

Our stand summarized, of course, is that “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” means:

That everyone, in the universal church, who(and we teach baptized as well) confesses Christ(16:16 the prior verse) will have eternal life and that the gates of hell(death) will not prevail.

We teach this is a verse about eternal life for all who are in Christs universal church.

What is your guys official stance? I do not like to argue unofficial stances or a Catholic personal interpretations. Is there an official stance on this one?
Thanks
Coffee break is over(5 minutes over Im afraid)

 

[DeFide]

".

*And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. *

*Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. *

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it

Our stand summarized, of course, is that “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” means:

That everyone, in the universal church, who(and we teach baptized as well) confesses Christ(16:16 the prior verse) will have eternal life and that the gates of hell(death) will not prevail.

We teach this is a verse about eternal life for all who are in Christs universal church.

My 2 cents:
Since Peter is on earth, Christ is establishing his earthly Church on Peter and the gates of hell will not prevail on it.

Another indicator Christ established an earthly, visible, Church:

‘If your brother sins against you, go and tell him his fault, between you and him alone. . . . But if he does not listen, take one or two others along with you. . . . If he refuses to listen . . . tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector’ (Mt 18:15-17).

And Ephesians 3:20-21:

‘Now to him who by the power at work within us is able to do far more abundantly than all that we ask or think, to him be glory in the Church and in Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.’

This Church that St. Paul is describing in Ephesians will be here to all generations (pasas tas geneas, ‘all the generations’) forever and ever. This eliminates the possibility of the gates of hell prevailing upon it for even one generation!

 

[Nicene]

Fredricks:

NOT TO ARGUE JUST CLARIFY
I am actually working on a bigger post but need clarification of what Catholicism’s official doctrine is on “the gates of hell shall not prevail”.

*And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

Mat 16:17 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed [it] unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.

Mat 16:18 And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it*

Our stand summarized, of course, is that “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” means:

That everyone, in the universal church, who(and we teach baptized as well) confesses Christ(16:16 the prior verse) will have eternal life and that the gates of hell(death) will not prevail.

We teach this is a verse about eternal life for all who are in Christs universal church.

What is your guys official stance? I do not like to argue unofficial stances or a Catholic personal interpretations. Is there an official stance on this one?
Thanks
Coffee break is over(5 minutes over Im afraid)

Your stance is OSAS if I am understanding correctly?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

 

[Della]

I recommend you read the Catechism of the Catholic Church beginning at #832, which is the official teaching of the Catholic Church.

 

[JaneFrances]

First, it would be prudent to point out that the Catholic Church allows, in most instances, room for varied interpretations of Scriptural passages which do not oppose doctrine and Tradition.

That is to say, one may have a perfectly valid personal interpretation of a particular passage as long as it does not contradict the teachings of the Church.

This may help:

(from Catholic Answers)

Scripture Passages Definitively Interpreted by the Church

Many people think the Church has an official “party line” about every sentence in the Bible. In fact, only a handful of passages have been definitively interpreted. The Church does interpret many passages in Scripture to guide her teaching. Other passages are used as the starting point and support of doctrine or moral teaching, but only these few have been “defined” in the strict sense of the word. Even in these few cases the Church is only defending traditional doctrine and morals.

It is important to realize that the parameters set by the definitions are all negative, that is, they point out what cannot be denied about the meaning of a passage but do not limit how much more the passage can be interpreted to say. In other words, the Church condemns denials of a specific interpretation of the text, without condemning meanings over and above but not contradictory to it.

All of the following passages were definitively interpreted by the Church at the Council of Trent, for each has to do with justification or the sacraments, issues that divided Catholics and Protestants.

1. John 3:5 “Unless a man is born of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God.”

The Church condemned the denial that the words of Jesus mean that real (natural) water must be used for a valid baptism. At the time, the Anabaptists contended that water baptism was unnecessary because the mention of water was merely a metaphor. Other symbolic meanings in addition to the literal sense of real water can be found in the text, perhaps, but none are acceptable that deny the need for real water at baptism.

1. Luke 22:19 and
2. I Corinthians 11:24-- “Taking the bread, he gave thanks, broke it and gave it to them, saying 'This is my body given for you: do this in remembrance of me.”

The Church condemned the interpretation of these passages that denied that Jesus, in commanding his apostles to “Do this in memory of me” after instituting the Eucharist, conferred priestly ordination on them and their successors enabling them to offer His body and blood. More could be understood by the command to do this in remembrance, but that much could not be denied or contradicted by other interpretations.

1. John 20:22-23-- “Receive the Holy Spirit. Whose sins you shall forgive, they areforgiven; whose sins you do not forgive, they are not forgiven,” and
2. Matthew 18:18-- “Whatever things you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

The Church condemned the denial that in these two passages Jesus conferred a power exclusively on the apostles authorizing them and their successors in the priestly office to forgive sins in God’s name, and condemned the proposal that everyone could forgive sins in this sense.

1. Romans 5:12-- “Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all men, because all sinned…”

The Church condemned the denial of original sin to which all mankind is subject and which baptism remits, citing this passage to be understood in that sense.

1. James 6:14-- “Is anyone of you sick? He should call the elders of the church to prayover him and anoint him with oil in the name of the Lord.”

Definitively interpreting these passages, the Church condemned the denial that the sacrament of the anointing of the sick was instituted by Christ and promulgated by the apostles against those who deemed it a human invention of the later Church.

In addition, the decree of Vatican I about Christ establishing Peter as head of the Church – which cites Mt 16:16 and John 1:42 – is a defined doctrine, even though the phrasing about the use and interpretation of the scripture cited is more implicit than explicit, by comparison with the above Scripture passages.

 

[JaneFrances]

Having said all that. . .Here is a good Biblical footnote (from a Catholic approved Scriptural text) that gives a general definition of “the gates of hell” which would be entirely in concert with Catholic doctrine:

The gates of hell, etc… That is, the powers of darkness, and whatever Satan can do, either by himself, or his agents. For as the church is here likened to a house, or fortress, built on a rock; so the adverse powers are likened to a contrary house or fortress, the gates of which, that is, the whole strength, and all the efforts it can make, will never be able to prevail over the city or church of Christ. By this promise we are fully assured, that neither idolatry, heresy, nor any pernicious error whatsoever shall at any time prevail over the church of Christ.

 

[JaneFrances]

What is your guys official stance?

I’m loving this, Fred. . .you’re dropping clues hither and thither. Can I infer from this colloquial “your guys” that you are not SOUTHERN Baptist?!!!

LOL. . .

 

[Eden]

JaneFrances:

I’m loving this, Fred. . .you’re dropping clues hither and thither. Can I infer from this colloquial “your guys” that you are not SOUTHERN Baptist?!!!

LOL. . .

Have you been writing this all down in that handy dandy notebook you mentioned earlier?

 

[Mickey]

JaneFrances:

I’m loving this, Fred. . .you’re dropping clues hither and thither. Can I infer from this colloquial “your guys” that you are not SOUTHERN Baptist?!!!

LOL. . .

We’ll find out which denomination Fred belongs to through the process of elimination.

 

[Steven_Merten]

Fredricks:

Our stand summarized, of course, is that “gates of hell shall not prevail against it” means:

That everyone, in the universal church, who(and we teach baptized as well) confesses Christ(16:16 the prior verse) will have eternal life and that the gates of hell(death) will not prevail.

Hello Fredricks,

Do you accept Jesus teaching that those Christians who call Jesus Lord, but do not obey His teachings, go to hell. Do You agree with Jesus teaching that to put faith in Him and to believe in Him means to keep the commands that He gives to Christians?

NAB MAT 7:21

"None of those who cry out, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of God but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. NAB LUK 6:43

Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord’ and not put into practice what I teach you?" NAB JOH 12:44

Jesus proclaimed aloud: “Whoever puts faith in me believes not so much in me as in him who sent me; and whoever looks on me is seeing him who sent me. I have come to the world as its light, to keep anyone who **believes **in me from remaining in the dark. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I am not the one to condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words already has his judge, namely, the word I have spoken it is that which will condemn him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own; no, the Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to speak. Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me.”

 

[Steven_Merten]

Hello Fredricks,

Do you accept or reject Jesus teaching that He will Judge people into heaven or into hell, according to their conduct?

NAB JOH 5:27

“The Father has given over to him power to pass judgment because he is Son of Man; no need for you to be surprised at this, for an hour is coming in which all those in their tombs shall hear his voice and come forth. Those who have done right shall rise to live; the evildoers shall rise to be damned.”
NAB REV 22:12

“Remember, I am coming soon! I bring with me the reward that will be given to each man as his conduct deserves. I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End! Happy are they who wash their robes so as to have free access to the tree of life and enter the city through its gates Outside are the dogs and sorcerers, the fornicators and murderers, the idol-worshipers and all who love falsehood.”

NAB MAT 25:31

“When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit upon his glorious throne, and all the nations will be assembled before him. And he will separate them one from another, as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will place the sheep on his right and the goats on his left. Then the king will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father. Inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me food, I was thirsty and you gave me drink, a stranger and you welcomed me, naked and you clothed me, ill and you cared for me, in prison and you visited me.’ Then the righteous will answer him and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you drink? When did we see you a stranger and welcome you, or naked and clothe you? When did we see you ill or in prison, and visit you?’ And the king will say to them in reply, ‘Amen, I say to you, whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me.’ Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you accursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me no food, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink, a stranger and you gave me no welcome, naked and you gave me no clothing, ill and in prison, and you did not care for me.’ Then they will answer and say, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or ill or in prison, and not minister to your needs?’ He will answer them, ‘Amen, I say to you, what you did not do for one of these least ones, you did not do for me.’ **And these will go off to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” **

 

[Fredricks]

JaneFrances:

Having said all that. . .Here is a good Biblical footnote (from a Catholic approved Scriptural text) that gives a general definition of “the gates of hell” which would be entirely in concert with Catholic doctrine:

Thank you Jane, yes, good summary. Della, thanks for pointing out that exact spot as well.

 

[Fredricks]

Nicene:

Your stance is OSAS if I am understanding correctly?

Peace and God Bless
Nicene

I do not think we have an official stance on that, at least that I have read. It was always said that one should follow the Bible, repent when they sin, and leave the judging to God.

 

[Fredricks]

Steven Merten:

Hello Fredricks,

Do you accept Jesus teaching that those Christians who call Jesus Lord, but do not obey His teachings, go to hell. Do You agree with Jesus teaching that to put faith in Him and to believe in Him means to keep the commands that He gives to Christians?

NAB MAT 7:21

"None of those who cry out, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of God but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven. NAB LUK 6:43

Why do you call me ‘Lord, Lord’ and not put into practice what I teach you?" NAB JOH 12:44

Jesus proclaimed aloud: “Whoever puts faith in me believes not so much in me as in him who sent me; and whoever looks on me is seeing him who sent me. I have come to the world as its light, to keep anyone who **believes **in me from remaining in the dark. If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I am not the one to condemn him, for I did not come to condemn the world but to save it. Whoever rejects me and does not accept my words already has his judge, namely, the word I have spoken it is that which will condemn him on the last day. For I have not spoken on my own; no, the Father who sent me has commanded me what to say and how to speak. Since I know that his commandment means eternal life, whatever I say is spoken just as he instructed me.”

I believe everything the Bible teaches.

 

[DeFide]

Fredricks:

I believe everything the Bible teaches.

Consider the case of two sincere people, who both love God equally, are equally intelligent, have an equal level of education, and they each take all Scripture into account.

As often happens, these two individuals nevertheless come to two mutually exclusive interpretations on some matter of faith or morality.

Doesn’t this show the invalidity of the tradition of “Sola Scriptura”?

 

[Eden]

Fredricks:

I believe everything the Bible teaches.

Do you believe the Holy Spirit has given you the gift of infallibility or when you read the Bible and discern what it teaches are you capable of making errors on matters of faith and morals?

 

[Fredricks]

DeFide:

Consider the case of two sincere people, who both love God equally, are equally intelligent, have an equal level of education, and they each take all Scripture into account.

As often happens, these two individuals nevertheless come to two mutually exclusive interpretations on some matter of faith or morality.

Doesn’t this show the invalidity of the tradition of “Sola Scriptura”?

No. Not anymore than two competing views of church authority, Catholic and Orthodox do.

It always boils down to how one person interprets(accepting Sola Scripture or accepting a Church authority(whichever one you choose).

 

[Fredricks]

Eden:

Do you believe the Holy Spirit has given you the gift of infallibility or when you read the Bible and discern what it teaches are you capable of making errors on matters of faith and morals?

I do not believe the Holy Spirit has given me the gift of infallibility.

 

[awfulthings9]

Hey Fredericks,

Would you mind expanding on your explanation for me. I think that the “keys to the kingdom” and “bind and loosen” verses are qualifiers to help us understand the implication of the “gates of Hell” verse. Your original post doesn’t address these, and while I’m sure you know the Catholic interpretation here, I think these verses need to be explained from your viewpoint before I can respond intelligently to the original post. I’ll give you my thoughts on your original post soon, but I needed to know exactly how differently we view the entire message in this exchange.

Specifically, I would like to know:

A) From your perspective, what do these additional verses mean?
B) Do they relate to, or qualify, the message about the gates of Hell never prevailing? (this might be answered in response to question A) If so, how?

Thanks and God bless,
Spencer

 

[Fredricks]

awfulthings9:

Hey Fredericks,

Would you mind expanding on your explanation for me. I think that the “keys to the kingdom” and “bind and loosen” verses are qualifiers to help us understand the implication of the “gates of Hell” verse. Your original post doesn’t address these, and while I’m sure you know the Catholic interpretation here, I think these verses need to be explained from your viewpoint before I can respond intelligently to the original post. I’ll give you my thoughts on your original post soon, but I needed to know exactly how differently we view the entire message in this exchange.

Specifically, I would like to know:

A) From your perspective, what do these additional verses mean?
B) Do they relate to, or qualify, the message about the gates of Hell never prevailing? (this might be answered in response to question A) If so, how?

Thanks and God bless,
Spencer

Well, this is turning into something quite differrent, I just wanted your guys view but I cannot seem to shut up!
ok, but this is going to get me eaten up because it takes so much longer to explain and I do not have my other verses to show what they mean all ready yet.
BUT, let me try, in short, which will leave me to be eaten alive, but concise manner.

Both verses too relate to eternal life, ie gates of hell.

Peter, did receive authority(keys of kingdom), which I think we need to be clear about how he CHOSE to use this based upon the whole NT, not just Matthew 16:18, or the keys to the kingdom. I cannot explain how he administered that, with the other apostles, although he is primary, concise enough without all of my verses.
The Apostles, with Peter being primary, set up the form of church government(local control but I know that you will not buy that) in the hands the elders, deacons, etc. I do not believe that a single bishop over a whole city is biblical, that developed about 50 to 100 years later. Okay, the keys(which Peter had) are their ability to expand everything, which they did, especially as it relates to the organization of his church, by which the message of eternal life was spread. We see this during that whole Apostolic era. Understanding that, for me, church in these passages is not talking about a huge world wide organization headed by one person, which would contradict the rest of the Bible. When we next see the keys, Christ has them in Revelation. Jesus allowed Peter and the Apostles to spread his message of eternal life by giving Peter the keys.

bind and losen
essentially the same thing but it is given to all of the Apostles two chapters later. Once again, the clear way that Peter used the key and losen and binding was with regards to the Gentiles. Jesus said he came for the Lost Sheep during his earthly mission. Peter, in his role of keeper of the keys, along with James and John decide exactly what that meant. Thus we have a truly universal church with ethnic and racial diversity, instead of a smaller sect of Judaism.