The gates of hell shall not prevail against WHO?

[gurneyhalleck1]

Your understanding of the Catholic interpretation of this scriptural reference is miles away from the truth of it. No one is saying Protestants are not Christians. And no one said that God doesn’t use them? I know I certainly have never said that? But what troubled me about this post is that your’re a self-proclaimed Catholic and yet the only real difference you see between us and Protestants is “bells and whistles?” WOW…apostolic succession, the papacy, 2,000 years of a deposit of faith, 7 holy sacraments, the Eucharist, Mary, and the moral teachings of the Church don’t make us Catholic, just bells and whistles? Other than that Protestants are basically the same? The gates of hell, we are told, will not prevail against Christ’s “Church” not all these denominations and an invisible theoretical straw-man of a church that we hear of from so many protestants. I greatly disagree with your interpretation of Matthew 16, with respect.

Well, I read about half the posts before being so overwhelmed with disappointment I had to stop reading and post.

Why should this be an occassion to argue about Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism? Christ has but one church…ALL CHRISTIANS are part of that one Church. So, yes my Catholic brothers…protestants are also Christians…unfortunately they don’t have all the bells and whistles…but God still uses them as well.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Christ founded the ONE CHURCH which we’ve splintered…but is still one in Christ…that the gates of hell will not prevail against it means that we are to be a militant church battering down the very gates of hell and reclaiming souls for God…figurative language meaning that we Christians are to face down evil and in the end…evil loses because Christ won the victory on the Cross.

 

[The_Ambassador]

This is like an Abbott and Costello “who’s on first?” type discussion, Ambassador. I’m not talking about the INDIVIDUALS within these denominations for goodness sake. Pay attention to what I’m saying. I’m talking about the OFFICIAL teachings of these churches.

The official teachings of these churches do not constitute the official teachings of the Protestant faith. If you were to judge many of these professing Protestant churches by official Protestant confessions and catechisms, you would quickly find out that these so-called Protestant churches are nowhere near being Protestant.

Whether you know it or not, people like you do a great injustice to Christ himself, when you pass such verdicts upon his people, when those verdicts are based upon inductive arguments that are wholly inadequate, and biased in their perceptions.

WOW…apostolic succession, the papacy, 2,000 years of a deposit of faith, 7 holy sacraments, the Eucharist, Mary, and the moral teachings of the Church don’t make us Catholic, just bells and whistles? The gates of hell, we are told, will not prevail against Christ’s **“Church.” **I greatly disagree with your interpretation of Matthew 16, with respect.

Even in your own words, you demonstrate a truth that you would otherwise deny. All of these practices and teachings are not what make you Christian, but what make you Catholic. You then put the emphasis upon the wrong part of the verse, in that you think it is being the “Church” that makes us able to withstand the gates of hell. But the emphasis ought to be on Christ!

It is because the Church belongs to CHRIST that we are not overthrown by the gates of hell, not because of these distinctly catholic (and unbiblical) traditions that you guys adhere to. :doh2:

 

[izoid]

Well, I read about half the posts before being so overwhelmed with disappointment I had to stop reading and post.

Why should this be an occassion to argue about Catholicism, Orthodoxy, Protestantism? Christ has but one church…ALL CHRISTIANS are part of that one Church. So, yes my Catholic brothers…protestants are also Christians…unfortunately they don’t have all the bells and whistles…but God still uses them as well.

The gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Christ founded the ONE CHURCH which we’ve splintered…but is still one in Christ…that the gates of hell will not prevail against it means that we are to be a militant church battering down the very gates of hell and reclaiming souls for God…figurative language meaning that we Christians are to face down evil and in the end…evil loses because Christ won the victory on the Cross.

As a recent revert to Catholicism I find this truly shocking and embarrassing. Please keep these aberrant ideas to yourself while you seek counsel to clear up your misunderstandings.

 

[izoid]

The official teachings of these churches do not constitute the official teachings of the Protestant faith. If you were to judge many of these professing Protestant churches by official Protestant confessions and catechisms, you would quickly find out that these so-called Protestant churches are nowhere near being Protestant.

Whether you know it or not, people like you do a great injustice to Christ himself, when you pass such verdicts upon his people, when those verdicts are based upon inductive arguments that are wholly inadequate, and biased in their perceptions.

I have encountered your arrogance on other threads and I can assure you that it is you that does a great injustice to Christ. You have an unteachable spirit about you that is quite shocking. Never forget, pride is the root of all sin.

 

[izoid]

The official teachings of these churches do not constitute the official teachings of the Protestant faith. If you were to judge many of these professing Protestant churches by official Protestant confessions and catechisms, you would quickly find out that these so-called Protestant churches are nowhere near being Protestant.

What teachings do constitute the official teachings of protestantism?

I have searched for a definitive document but cannot find one. It is probably due to the fact that I am a stupid Catholic but I would like to see it if you could direct me to it.

 

[The_Ambassador]

I have encountered your arrogance on other threads and I can assure you that it is you that does a great injustice to Christ. You have an unteachable spirit about you that is quite shocking. Never forget, pride is the root of all sin.

Look whose talking.

 

[izoid]

Look whose talking.

Wow…that was a good one, guess you told me huh.

 

[The_Ambassador]

Wow…that was a good one, guess you told me huh.

Now . . . which of the fruits of the Spirit are you currently demonstrating by your conversation? Pride and self-righteousness are not fruits of the Spirit, just so you know. Name calling is no fruit of the Holy Spirit. But what about longsuffering? What about grace? Are you familiar with these Christian virtues? If you are, then why do you suspend the use of them when dealing with another Christian? Is the foot any better than the eye?

One would think that they who have this so-called 2000 year deposit of truth would be those who conduct themselves in a true Christian manner. But instead, in my experience, they would rather justify their sinful behaviors by simply comparing themselves with other men, instead of comparing themselves by the word of God and Christ himself.

Is this the glory of Catholicism?

 

[izoid]

The official teachings of these churches do not constitute the official teachings of the Protestant faith. If you were to judge many of these professing Protestant churches by official Protestant confessions and catechisms, you would quickly find out that these so-called Protestant churches are nowhere near being Protestant.

Whether you know it or not, people like you do a great injustice to Christ himself, when you pass such verdicts upon his people, when those verdicts are based upon inductive arguments that are wholly inadequate, and biased in their perceptions.

Even in your own words, you demonstrate a truth that you would otherwise deny. All of these practices and teachings are not what make you Christian, but what make you Catholic. You then put the emphasis upon the wrong part of the verse, in that you think it is being the “Church” that makes us able to withstand the gates of hell. But the emphasis ought to be on Christ!

It is because the Church belongs to CHRIST that we are not overthrown by the gates of hell, not because of these distinctly catholic (and unbiblical) traditions that you guys adhere to. :doh2:

The hypocrisy is evident.

I was simply pointing out how you seem to feel above all of us. If you feel the need to turn the attack on me for simply pointing out your own words, oh well. Remember, he who lives in a glass house should not throw stones.

Would you care to answer my previous questions now?

 

[izoid]

Now . . . which of the fruits of the Spirit are you currently demonstrating by your conversation? Pride and self-righteousness are not fruits of the Spirit, just so you know. Name calling is no fruit of the Holy Spirit. But what about longsuffering? What about grace? Are you familiar with these Christian virtues? If you are, then why do you suspend the use of them when dealing with another Christian? Is the foot any better than the eye?

One would think that they who have this so-called 2000 year deposit of truth would be those who conduct themselves in a true Christian manner. But instead, in my experience, they would rather justify their sinful behaviors by simply comparing themselves with other men, instead of comparing themselves by the word of God and Christ himself.

Is this the glory of Catholicism?

You are very funny. I was simply pointing you to your own behavior. Look at my post right before this one, I have included your accusations in case you forgot.

 

[The_Ambassador]

You are very funny. I was simply pointing you to your own behavior. Look at my post right before this one, I have included your accusations in case you forgot.

My accusations in the bold, are based upon the premises of their context.

 

[izoid]

My accusations in the bold, are based upon the premises of their context.

I would hope that you would see how it can be very offensive when you tell people these things. It comes across as arrogant and condescending even if that is not the intention. It is always best to disagree without telling someone how much smarter you are than they are.

 

[The_Ambassador]

I would hope that you would see how it can be very offensive when you tell people these things. It comes across as arrogant and condescending even if that is not the intention. It is always best to disagree without telling someone how much smarter you are than they are.

When did I say that I was smarter than you?

Christian truth is not a matter of intellectual apprehension, but spiritual revelation.

I am nothing. My knowledge is not innate, but is simply a gift of grace.

Who am I? Who have I claimed to be?

The answer to both questions is . . . nobody supreme.

So when did I every say that I was smarter than you?

 

[The_Ambassador]

I have a few questions:

1. What constitutes Christ’s Church?
2. What would be the result of the gates of hell “prevailing” against his Church?
   2a) Would the result be an eternal damnation; a loss of salvation?

 

[izoid]

When did I say that I was smarter than you?

Christian truth is not a matter of intellectual apprehension, but spiritual revelation.

I am nothing. My knowledge is not innate, but is simply a gift of grace.

Who am I? Who have I claimed to be?

The answer to both questions is . . . nobody supreme.

So when did I every say that I was smarter than you?

What denomination are you associated with? You style is very familiar to me and I am curious to where you worship?

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

The gates of hell shall not prevail against WHO? The pugai (gate) of adou (hades) do not prevail against an autos (person) but an auths (thing).

I’ve been studying Greek for about 4 years now and thought an overview of some of the key words in MT 16:18, scriptural interpretation and translation of the 6 key Greek words (From the Textus Receptus) might be of some benefit to the continuing discussion. For instance, the Greek word for church or assembly is ekklhsian. Is it a noun, an article, a preposition, antecedent, a subject or a verb? The answer is given below, but one of the wrong answers is a noun. Really.

First of all Simon/Peter’s name is Simeon which is the proper Hebrew for his name, furthermore – Jesus could not have renamed Simeon as Peter. For one reason, Peter is a Latin name/word and there is no evidence that Jesus, or any of the disciples spoke Latin. The only reason he is known as Peter is because when Jesus “said thou art petros” the Greek word petros sounded like the Latin name Peter. Simeon/petros was not called Peter until Latin became the language of the church. I’ve searched out several of the 155 cases where Simeon is called Peter and the Textus Receptus says “petros” in some cases he is called Peter before Jesus named him petros. Also there is some evidence that the disciples continued to call Simeon by his given name, see Acts 15:13 – 14. Note that if Simeon objected to this it was not recorded.

As a refresher here is MT 16:18 from the New Jerusalem Bible: “So now I say to you: You are Peter and on this rock I will build my community. And the gates of the underworld can never overpower it.”

And the literal Greek to English is:

“and I also to thee say that you are rock and on this mountain chain I will build my call to assembly and gates of hades shall not prevail against it” (No I haven’t left any words out, or added any, this is the Greek.

(Note: There are no capital letters in the ancient Greek, the caps that one sees today are a modern contrivance to Anglify the Greek.)

Now I will give the verse in Greek and underline the 6 critical words, the definitions are immediately below the quote:

“kago de soi lego oti su ei petros kai epi tauth th petra oikodomhso mou thn ekklhsian kai pugai adou ou katiscusousin auths”

1. S4074: petros (masculine) means rock
2. S4073: petra (feminine) means a broken chain of granite mountains, a cliff or a person of unbending character.
3. S1557: ekklhsian is a secular word and a verb meaning: a call to any group to assembly. Thus it can’t be a church.
4. S4439: pugai is gate, literally or figuratively.
5. S86: adou means Hades which is “the place (state) of departed souls, the grave.
6. auths* is a pronoun and means this or it [it does not mean who, if so then auths might have been “autos” making it some one and not some thing. The Greeks have a lot more pronouns than does English.

• auths is not a word of theological significance (so it isn’t in my 10 volume Theological Dictionary of the NT (TDNT)) and I was unable to find the word in Strongs index. I am able to translate it because of the number of times I’ve seen it used and when, where, and how it’s used.

This is my translation, “I also say to you that you are [a*] rock and on this chain of mountains I will build my call to assembly and the gate of hades shall not prevail against this/it.” This is from the literal Greek in the Textus Receptus. Would Jesus really say “Simeon, you are rock and…” Once again, based on my studies I conclude that there should be an “a” there in helping to translate the verse to English.

• a, there is no Greek word meaning “a” as we use it in English. It is inferred from the word preceding the noun, verb, adjective &etc by translators who are interpreting the Greek into English that is syntactically and semantically correct.

As can be seen Jesus did not use the word rock [petros] twice so I think he used “petra” for a very specific reason. I find it interesting that He used the feminine word petra because He may have been referring to the implicit reproductive capabilities of the female of the species; meaning the ability to grow the ekklhsian (call to assembly). I don’t know if this is going out on a limb or not but one might reasonably infer his mother in his use of petra. Also in the OT God is very often referred to as an unshakeable mountain.

Ekklhsian is a compound, secular Greek verb meaning a) a call or cry out, like a town crier. b) fo a group of people to assemble. See TDNT VII pp 445 – 446. Ekklhsian has become ecclesia in English and it has about as many definitions as there are denominations. Also it has been changed from a verb to a noun.

Gate/pugai: As I recall this word has already been discussed so I will note that in the OT “gates” is used 106 times and gate is used 193 times. I will not attempt to analyze this because my work is in the NT and the Greek and this is enough.

This was written as a single letter but due to its length I’ve had to break it into two parts.

 

[Simeon_Hovey]

This was written as a single letter but due to its length I’ve had to break it into two parts.

I will not attempt to discuss the deeper meanings of Hades [It seems like it could be a hot button subject and a proper topic for another thread.] except to note that Jesus usually used the word gehenna (for hell), which is a valley outside of Jerusalem that was used as a garbage dump; and the place was always burning at some level. And that to understand the relationship of pugai/gate to adou/hades in this passage one would also have to delve into the Hebrew word sheol as follows:

S7585 sh@‘owl sheh-ole’: or shol {sheh-ole’}; from 7592; Hades or the world of the dead (as if a subterranean retreat), including its accessories and inmates:–grave, hell, pit.
S7592 sha’al shaw-al’: or shael {shaw-ale’}; a primitive root; to inquire; by implication, to request; by extension, to demand:–ask (counsel, on), beg, borrow, lay to charge, consult, demand, desire, X earnestly, enquire, + greet, obtain leave, lend, pray, request, require, + salute, X straitly, X surely, wish.

When I lived out west I became the very best of friends with a Jewish woman; I asked her about the afterlife according to the Jewish faith and the most I can say about what I got from her words is that the Jewish afterlife, or sheol, is “a pretty iffy concept.” Based on her answer, and having read her (exhaustively annotated) copy of the Torah it only served to pose more questions; I wanted to ask her more about Judaism but I couldn’t think of a diplomatic way to frame the questions. IE since there is no apparent rationale/benefit in this life or the next, Sheol, then why be a… well, that’s as much as I wish to state here too. I just want to say that some of the things I love about Christianity are the joy that comes from practicing works (helping others), the sacrifice Jesus made for us all; and the gift of the Holy Spirit; and I believe we are saved by faith and justified by our works.

As to pugai and hades, I don’t know that if matters if the gate/s are meant to keep something in or to keep something out. In my own mind when Jesus sacrificed Himself on the cross and descended into Hell; which to me would mean total and final separation from God; I can’t think of anything worse. Being a disabled military veteran living with a spinal cord injury that has made me a paraplegic and living in constant and often severe pain; I think I can speak with some experience on what physical, mental and emotional hell is. He conquered sin and death (I also have some small experience with the latter.) and nothing, not even the gate/s of Hades can prevail against that.

Your brother in Christ, Simeon

PS: Jesus has performed literal Biblical miracles in my life; in 2005 my legs were paralyzed and I was in a wheelchair until this year when I prayed with faith for healing. And while I may never go on a 20-mile day hike again, I can walk again and live the meaningful life that He has given to me. One of those things has been that I have the time to learn Greek and can read the full richness of the NT that gets left out of all translations. It is my hope and belief that Jesus has given me this time, the gift and the responsibility to write another translation of the NT, which brings out the full richness and original meaning of the Greek. An example of this is the first 4 verses of 1 John 1. Not only have the authors touched, seen and heard Jesus but they’ve had a life changing seminal experience because of this, they have grasped the full meaning of Christ. Furthermore the light (phos) that John writes about (or dictates possibly) is that phos has the second meaning of illuming the word of God.

In the following, if anyone is interested, the following is an example [and puzzle] on the difficulties of interpretation and translation.

Suppose someone were to say that Jesus’ annulled and voided one of the 10 Commandments? If so which one might it be?

1. You shall have no other gods before Me.
2. You shall not make for yourself a carved image–any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
3. You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain.
4. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5. Honor your father and your mother.
6. You shall not murder. NOTE: This is the correct Hebrew translation, it never was, “Thou shalt not kill.”
7. You shall not commit adultery.
8. You shall not steal.
9. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
10. You shall not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbor’s.

There is such a verse and it turns the 5th commandment on its head, it is a verse which commands us to hate; if you don’t think so then check out LK 14:26. KJV 2000, “If any man come to me, and hate (miseo) not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brothers, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”

I don’t know if anyone else has truly experienced hate but it is a terrifically self-destructive emotion and the only one it hurts is one self. Hate was destroying my life until I turned to God for help and put my life in his hands. Does anyone really think Jesus expects us to hate that which the fifth commandment tells us to honor?

The problem here is generated by the incorrect interpretation and translation of the Greek word: miseo. Which is a variation of the primary word misos: which does means to hate, detest, and persecute. (Note that many English words, though they be the same word, have many different meanings.) The word miseo is a similar word and in this case it means to love ones parents/family less than Jesus, or to love Jesus more than one’s family. But to say we must hate is a violation of just about everything Christianity stands for.

 

[Javl]

Simeon Hovey:

Thank you for your interesting and informative post. As a matter of curiosity, from what class of the Greek language did you translate this from? Koine, Classical, or Modern Greek? It is my understanding that most of the early writings were in Koine Greek which is a bit different from Modern Greek. Again, thank you. God Bless.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Hisalone]

As to pugai and hades, I don’t know that if matters if the gate/s are meant to keep something in or to keep something out. Your brother in Christ, Simeon

.

Keep what in or keep what out?

The Catholic interpretation is that the gates of the Church will prevail against hades or hell. But that is not what the verse says.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

What are talking about? For goodness sakes, there is no ONE protestant faith at all? Take your pick? Baptist protestantism? Lutheran? Methodist? Anglican? Megachurch feelgood halleljuah churches, Assemblies of God, Presbyterian? Which “offical teachings of THE protestant faith” are you talking about? It is the very lack of unity and incoherence that you speak in each post that Protestants themselves teach. My posts reflect a visible, tangiable, 2,000-year old faith, not an invisible entity that is vague, scattered and maleable like playdough. I have absolutely no idea which “church” you’re talking about nor does anyone else in here? And I fail to understand which denominations you yourself categorize as not being protestant? You’re so vague that it’s difficult to understand your point in all this. If we don’t judge a denomination by what it teaches and stands for, what do you propose we judge it by? I judge Calvinism by TULIP and the Westminister Confession, Lutherans by their official positions from their Large and Small Catechism as well as by the Augsburgh Confession, Anglicanism by the 39 Articles and its official positions, etc. Most denominations are confessional or at least lex ordandi lex credendi, and there is a rubric from which to assess their belief system. I don’t have a clue as to what your actual point really is, Ambassador. For being an ambassador you do a poor job of bringing your faith and representing it to me or others who want to comprehend it. Your ambassadorship is vague, arrogant, critical, condescending, and cloudy.

And again you invoke the inductive argument malarky and bias. Friend, our faith makes us biased! I’m proudly biased for the Catholic Faith. Sue me. If I am wholly convinced of the papacy, the Rock of the faith, the catechism, the deposit of faith, apostolic succession, the seven sacraments, the councils, scripture, and the Catholic Church, do you seriously expect me to see your invisible church of bible-believers as sufficient, valid, and possessing legitimacy?

I resent you saying that I do Christ Jesus a disservice. I would not render such a claim upon you.

You truly reveal how little you know about Catholicism by saying that the emphasis of my arguments and Catholicism is not on Jesus. Absolutely absurd, insane statement. Everyone in CAF whom I know to be protestant are respectful to the Church knowing that Catholicism is based on Christ, period. The Rock of Peter is based on Christ. The deposit of faith is from the Holy Spirit, apostolic succession stands on the Holy Spirit. The priesthood was established by Christ, the graces of the sacraments flow from Christ Almighty, and we are fully children of Christ. To believe that I as a Catholic do not believe the Rock that is the papacy was not established by Christ and maintained by Christ shows you have one heck of a lot of reading, studying, and meditating to do on the Catholic faith. You’re obviously a bible-alone sola scriptura protestant with an agenda to agitate and your catechesis in Catholicism is abysmal at best. You’re not convincing anyone. First of all, whatever your denomination or creed is, it’d be refreshing to actually hear it! It would also be nice if you could make sense in your posts. God bless.

The official teachings of these churches do not constitute the official teachings of the Protestant faith. If you were to judge many of these professing Protestant churches by official Protestant confessions and catechisms, you would quickly find out that these so-called Protestant churches are nowhere near being Protestant.

Whether you know it or not, people like you do a great injustice to Christ himself, when you pass such verdicts upon his people, when those verdicts are based upon inductive arguments that are wholly inadequate, and biased in their perceptions.

Even in your own words, you demonstrate a truth that you would otherwise deny. All of these practices and teachings are not what make you Christian, but what make you Catholic. You then put the emphasis upon the wrong part of the verse, in that you think it is being the “Church” that makes us able to withstand the gates of hell. But the emphasis ought to be on Christ!

It is because the Church belongs to CHRIST that we are not overthrown by the gates of hell, not because of these distinctly catholic (and unbiblical) traditions that you guys adhere to. :doh2: