W
WayneTalbot
Guest
I’m curious as to how you derive this interpretation of the “gates of hell” quote, it is not one that I would derive from the context.Glad you are enjoying our exchanges! I believe this is a good learning experience for us all.
but the “Pillar of Truth” stands…“gates shall not prevail against it”…meaning it will teach no error in regards to what is incontrovertibly true.
peace be with you
In fact, I would say that you are drawing a very long bow indeed, ascribing a meaning which is simply not there.
Jesus’ statement itself is interesting: some Church interpretations have it that Satan shall not prevail “over” the Church. But a gate is a defensive mechanism, not a means of offence.
A straight reading of that text leads to a meaning the opposite of which is generally held. Unless it has changed, the Church teaches that Satan is fighting against the Church and he can’t win. The text puts the shoe on the other foot: the Church is waging war against Satan, and he cannot sustain a defence (gates) against the Church.
Now, just what exactly is the “church”?
With this understanding of the “gates of hell” text, putting Satan on the defensive rather than the offensive, the battle is at a spiritual level rather than physical, since we on earth cannot wage physical war against Satan.
What will defeat Satan, other than Jesus Christ, the belief in, and acceptance of Him?
I would use this as another example of where Scripture has been turned around, misinterpreted even, to support a premise which is not even implied in the text.
It was Gregory the Great, Pope Gregory I (590-604) who laid down the four principles of exegesis, chief among them being that we should take the plain meaning before any other (if I have understood him correctly).
The plain meaning of “the gates of hell shall not prevail” is that the defence of hell shall not prevail against attack.
It is, to be sure, another line of thought, but one which to me is more consistent with the text and how we should understand it.