The gates of hell shall not prevail against WHO?

[kimmielittle]

Hiyas Hisalone

I must say this is one of the hmmmm…strangest threads I’ve ever read.

I had a Jewish friend Ben M. that you would have probably liked.

As Always, just my thoughts

 

[ricko]

Hell is a prison which holds lost souls. The gates of hell cannot prevail against Christs Church in preaching the gospel and the word of God which will free those enslaved and the gates will not be able to hold them in.

Hell is eternal. Nothing comes out. Don’t you read the bible instead of making things up?

 

[Javl]

No it not a reference to support your false theology.
You cant just make stuff up and say this is how this verse should be interpreted.

If there is any false theology it is on your side. Are you a theologian? Have you had any training in theology? If so, then as such you would know better than to make such a blatant statement. The Catholic Church has received a direct commission and authority from God. It alone has the God given right to interpret Scripture. It alone has the right to teach right from wrong and it alone has the fullness of truth given to it by Jesus ( God ).

You have fallen into the trap of sola scriptura, which is the cause of, and has resulted in the splintering of Christianity into its myriad of denominations. If you insist on interprting scripture on your own, you will fall deeper and deep into the pit of error that has been dug by the “great deceiver” and will never be able to climb out. My friend, before you make any confrontational statements, please think of what you are doing and saying.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Norrin]

*So, you are non-denominational? What exactly does that mean? Now, I know the definition of non-denominational, but don’t all those Christian faiths that claim non-denominational end up developing their own customs over the years, which essentially and eventually make them denominational?

My church was started by a pastor who came in from a foriegn land. So our history is short, within one generation. Most nonDenoms are similar started by one man. If developing customs over years is a sign for denomination then Catholicism is definetly a denomination.

By its simplest terms, every religion has denominations. Your attempt to “jab” at the Catholic Church using sarcasm rings hollow.

As for whether the Catholic Church can err? I am in agreement with the Catholic Church in the belief that the it is guided by the Holy Spirit, and when it comes to matters of faith, then the Church cannot and does not err. The deposit of faith has remained unchanged in 2000 years, and it will continue to remain unchanged until Christ’s return. When he returns, who knows what new things he will let the world know.

Catholic teaching has changed througout the years. Do your own research examining original source documents from ceturies ago.

The Deposit of Faith of the Church has remained unchanged since its founding. Now, if you mean things like whether a priest can marry, then yes, those things have changed over time. But that example is not a part of the Deposit of Faith. If you don’t agree, can you name one thing that the Catholic Church has changed from its original Deposit of Faith?

So what is my reason in believing this? It’s simple. Since the Protestant Reformation, protestant denominations have continued to splinter to the point where there are over 3000 different versions of that faith in existence today. At the same time, there remains only one Catholic Church. This tells me that one is completely grounded in Truth, and the others have Truth in them, but with some doctrinal error (hence the continued fracturing). But hey, I’m Catholic, so you’re not surprised at my conclusion, are you?

I would be suprised if you said otherwise…

But can you explain the continued fracturing of the Protestant faiths?*

 

[Xavierlives]

The term aons is employed by profane writers to signify the state of souls after death. The Septuagint uniformly renders this term the Hebrew which signifies in general the place of the dead. It was represented in the Old Testament as a dark subterranean land inhabited by the souls of the dead. It gates are spoken of by Isaiah: “I said in the noontide of my days, I shall go into the gates of Sheol.” (Isaiah 38:10) Thus in the Old Testament it was a vague idea to designate the state of the dead. It included the grave, but united with it that unknown state of being in which the dead remain until the resurrection.

In the New Testament the term Hades which is the equivalent of Sheol is frequently used to signify the state after death of the wicked. It also signifies Satan’s realm. Thus it is used in Revelation 20:14: “And death and Hades were cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death, the lake of fire.” This is clearly the sense in which Christ employs the term here. Satan and all those agencies which work with him and are controlled by him shall wage war upon the Church, but they shall not prevail.

By a metaphor usual in Eastern languages the power of this city is spoken of as its gates. Throughout the nations of the East it was in the gates of the villages and cities that all cases were tried, and justice administered; hence figuratively the power and authority of the cities were called its gates. So well known is this in all Oriental literature that it is unnecessary to addduce citations to prove it. It is evident therefore that Christ by this figure asserts that all the power of Satan and of his servants shall not prevail against the organized Church of Christ. We believe also that in the expression “the gates of Hades” there is included also the forces of this world; it includes every force that makes for Satan.

It is evident that the entity, against which the power of Satan’s kingdom shall not prevail, is the Church, and for the reason that it is built upon a rock. It is the idea therefore of Christ that the stability of the Church comes from the nature of its foundation, and that this foundation is such that the Church cannot fail.

Of course, the Church is not built on a human foundation; the Church is built on the infinite power of Christ. But Christ has chosen to be represented in the Church by a center of authority, and hence this authority is upheld by Christ himself. Now that central authority is Peter and his successors.

cont.

This is not the first time I have heard this, but until this moment I never really thought about it from a Jesus perspective. Where was Jesus tried? Was that the Gates of Hell?

 

[Xavierlives]

If there is any false theology it is on your side. Are you a theologian? Have you had any training in theology? If so, then as such you would know better than to make such a blatant statement. The Catholic Church has received a direct commission and authority from God. It alone has the God given right to interpret Scripture. It alone has the right to teach right from wrong and it alone has the fullness of truth given to it by Jesus ( God ).

You have fallen into the trap of sola scriptura, which is the cause of, and has resulted in the splintering of Christianity into its myriad of denominations. If you insist on interprting scripture on your own, you will fall deeper and deep into the pit of error that has been dug by the “great deceiver” and will never be able to climb out. My friend, before you make any confrontational statements, please think of what you are doing and saying.

I am so glad God gave men 1600 years ago an intelligence and wisdom beyond my current feeble mind, to tell me what it all means, so I don’t have to think for myself.

 

[Javl]

I am so glad God gave men 1600 years ago an intelligence and wisdom beyond my current feeble mind, to tell me what it all means, so I don’t have to think for myself.

If God gave them the wisdom and intelligence as you claim, then they would not have fallen into the pit as you are ready to do. They would have remained within the Catholic Church. I know you are not thinking for yourself, for if you were you would truly understand what we are trying to explain to you. Peace.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[Xavierlives]

If God gave them the wisdom and intelligence as you claim, then they would not have fallen into the pit as you are ready to do. They would have remained within the Catholic Church. I know you are not thinking for yourself, for if you were you would truly understand what we are trying to explain to you. Peace.

Because that is exactly what I need. Someone to explain it to me.

 

[Xavierlives]

If God gave them the wisdom and intelligence as you claim, then they would not have fallen into the pit as you are ready to do. They would have remained within the Catholic Church. I know you are not thinking for yourself, for if you were you would truly understand what we are trying to explain to you. Peace.

Lol… um… ok.

I was using sarcasm and referencing quite the opposite. I’m pretty sure God has made us all intelligent enough to understand his word.

And trying to say I am about to fall in a pit is cute. I luckily I’m not sure where you stand so I’ll just let Jesus judge.

 

[Tomster]

That is why God gave His Church His written word, to be used as a plumb line agianst all deviations.

Since, then, the Church is the divinely appointed custodian of revelation, it is evidently her office to preserve not merely the letter of Scripture, but also their meaning. The Church, therefore, is the authentic and infallible interpreter of Scripture and not any individual person.

I am glad you are starting to understand this from the Catholic point of view.

The only question that now remains for you to answer is where is that Church, Hisalone?

 

[Javl]

Lol… um… ok.

I was using sarcasm and referencing quite the opposite. I’m pretty sure God has made us all intelligent enough to understand his word.

And trying to say I am about to fall in a pit is cute. I luckily I’m not sure where you stand so I’ll just let Jesus judge.

Don’t worry I’m nowhere near that pit, but you keep on going the way you are and you’ll surely fall in the pit of heresy.

PAX DOMINI

Shalom Aleichem

 

[The_Ambassador]

Let’s take your post, #14, where you surmise that because a few individual churches in certain geographical locations in the early church fell apart, then that means the Church (capital C, Catholic, Church in its totality) has been toppled by sin before in general . . . that because some churches have had heresies or evaporated then it must needs be that the entire Church has allowed the gates of hell to prevail. You assume that the presence of heresy means the entire church has a cancer about it. At least that is what your all-too-brief and vague post seems to conclude. Sounds inductive…hmmmm…

Actually, you are way off. That was not what I was surmising, and that was not what I was assuming. But thanks for sharing your imagination with me

What I was actually trying to communicate was that in your bashing of particular (so-called) Protestant denominations, you were making an inductive and inconsistent argument. It was pure abusive ad-hominem.

My whole point was that just because certain professing Protestant denominations have crumbled into heresy and false religion, this proves nothing against Protestantism as a whole. This is why I mentioned the 1st century churches that fell away. The fact that Corinth was overthrown by carnality and the Galatian churches were infested with false doctine, proves nothing against the Christian Church as a whole.

I only made this point in order to show the futility of inductive arguments, (taking a particular instance and drawing a universal conclusion) which was what you were doing with Protestantism.

 

[Grace_Angel]

“And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.” Matthew 16:18

I am not disputing about Peter’s role but the last phrase: “the gates of hell shall not prevail against it”

The Catholic Church has been standing there for 2000 years and it will stand there until the end of times, there is no doubt about this since the Lord himself who wills it.

What about other churches?

Can we say that the gates of hell have prevailed against the continuously divided protestant denominations since Martin Luther?

Or, is there any protestant denominations that have been closing down since its founding?
I am wondering, in real world scenario, what effect a church will suffer as a result of the gates of hell prevail against it.

The Anglican is splitting because of the homosexual ordinations but the church itself is still standing.
The Catholic church suffered many scandals and corruptions in the past but it’s still standing.

Or maybe the gates of hell will not prevail also against all protestant denominations until the end of times?

The gates of hell shall not prevail against the one Holy Catholic anbd apostolic church founded by Jesus Christ under the leadership of “Peter”.

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

Thank you, William F. Buckley! :clapping:

Throw out every vocabulary word from your philosophy and debate classes you took in your college years that you want, the bottom line is that the failure of Protestantism is evident. Thousands of denominations, no real connection from any of them to the Early Church in the first five centuries that we know so much about, divorce/remarriage/abortion/cohabitation/female ordination/alternative lifestyles/gay marriage/unethical science endorsements/sola scriptura/sola fide/no authority/biblical interpretations that are rogue and absurd…these are the “fruits” of the Deformation of the 16th Century. If you cannot see the chaos, insanity, disunity, and heresies that the Deformation brought us, then you are the one with the vivid imagination. If you seriously think there is a such thing as cohesion and coherence within Protestantism other than a a fill-in-the-blanks feel-good theology, then your imagination rivals mine. But thanks for the compliment. Imagination is important in the intelligence quotient. It reminds me of a quote: “With our progress we have destroyed our only weapon against tedium: that rare weakness we call imagination.” – Oriana Fallaci

You are very good at trying to rip apart my arguments, which at least have a conclusion, but you rarely make your own arguments or valid comments. Protestantism is untenable and you know it. Of your 16 posts, most are just poking holes in the statements of others and adversarial overtones abound. You rarely make a point and have your own views, just a counter to other posts. I will not bother to respond to you again.
If you like chaos, anachronisms, and TULIP-style predestination, keep on truckin’ with Protestantism.
“To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant.”
Take a few history courses and get back to me in a few years…but congrats on your debating vocabulary. :dancing:

Actually, you are way off. That was not what I was surmising, and that was not what I was assuming. But thanks for sharing your imagination with me

What I was actually trying to communicate was that in your bashing of particular (so-called) Protestant denominations, you were making an inductive and inconsistent argument. It was pure abusive ad-hominem.

My whole point was that just because certain professing Protestant denominations have crumbled into heresy and false religion, this proves nothing against Protestantism as a whole. This is why I mentioned the 1st century churches that fell away. The fact that Corinth was overthrown by carnality and the Galatian churches were infested with false doctine, proves nothing against the Christian Church as a whole.

I only made this point in order to show the futility of inductive arguments, (taking a particular instance and drawing a universal conclusion) which was what you were doing with Protestantism.

 

[The_Ambassador]

The bottom line is that the failure of Protestantism is evident :dancing:

Again, this is an inductive argument at best. You make your assertions with such confidence, and this is very amusing. Yet your assertions do not take into consideration a true evaluation of the whole. They are based only upon a skewed and partial view of that which calls itself Protestantism.

If my definition of catholicism was “that which constitutes each and every professing catholic I know,” then the inevitable conslusion that I would draw is that catholicism is not only unbiblical, but also full of divorce, sexual immorality, murder, and blanket idolatry.

My best approach to the situation is not to form my own definition of what true catholicim is (*based upon my own incomplete and uninformed observations * ) but to allow the catholic apologists themselves to define and defend it according to the official standards of their church. I must allow the leading proponents of your church to define who is and who is not a true catholic before I even attempt to make my assessment of catholicism. This is exactly what you should do with respect to protestantism.

But the whole point of our conversing is to establish what constitutes the true church.

And so I ask you: How do you know that your church is the true church?

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

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.

For example:

The ELCA (Evangelical Lutheran Church of America) openly, officially, and proudly allows openly gay clergy to be “ordained” within their ranks. They also openly and officially remarry divorcees no questions asked, etc. Is that individual pastors or lay folks doing this? sure. But it’s the official doctrines of the national church that permit it. So where is the inductive argument here? They as a church body teach and encourage sin. It’s simple, its easy for you to understand, it’s not inductive. They also teach and believe that apostolic succession is unnecessary for consecrations of the Eucharist and the sacraments by and large. That’s official, that’s universal for ELCA.

The TEC (The Episcopal Church) teaches officially in writing in their charter and constitutions that
gay marriage is sanctionable
gay clergy can and should be ordained
cohabitation and other sinful lifestyles don’t eliminate someone from taking communion
Transexuals and bisexuals are to be given communion, practicing ones
Are these the acts of individuals or is this the official policy of the TEC church itself? These are heretical teachings, immoral ones, and they are official. The Anaheim convention made sure to that.

So how is this inductive? I’m not condemning whole churches based on individual sins, but the philosophy of the churches themselves. Mormonism, for example, is essentially polytheistic, denies the trinity, teaches a form of pelagianism, declares God the Father as a physical man, claims God has a female counterpart, etc. etc. Do I need to condemn individual behavior with official heresies like that?

Again, your arguments only try to poke holes in everyone else’s statements. You yourself have not ONCE declared in here what YOUR definition of a protestant is and why you are opposed to Catholicism. For a change, let’s try this. You reply to my post without the high horse Socratic questioning and smug pedantic rhetoric and just tell us YOUR views on protestantism and Catholicism and explain why. How do YOU know your Church is the true church?

I’ll answer your question out of courtesy. I hope you’ll reply with your own views and summation and not just a nit-picking of mine.
I know the Catholic Church is the true Church because:

a) it’s apostolic, succession has continued with our bishops, cardinals, and popes ensuring valid sacraments and holiness of doctrine

b) it contains the deposit of faith from the Scriptures, the Councils, and 2,000 years of wisdom

c) The papacy is the Rock on which Christ established His Church and we are told by Christ that the gates of hell would not prevail against it

d) The Church teaches true morality consistent with scripture, the natural law, tradition, and the early church. It opposes homosexuality as an active lifestyle, divorce and remarriage, abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research, the death penalty, and it is a champion for the poor, the homeless, immigrants, and the elderly. It is the strongest proponent of the unborn on this planet. Protestantism of all breeds allows one or usually more of these sinful teachings to be a part of its constitution. There isn’t a Protestant church I’m aware of that doesn’t allow divorce and remarriage. Many permit abortion while many do not. Many are ok with embryonic stem cell research while many are not. Some permit abortion, most do not. Some are ok with euthanasia, many are not. But all of them are ok with some of these sinful actions. To be the true church it must be One, Holy, catholic, and apostolic. Protestantism is not holy because it permits the teachings of these sins, one or more of them. It is not apostolic because there is no succession in most save Old Catholic, Anglican, etc. To be catholic they must be universal and in line with the ECFs which none are, etc.

e) It is free of Calvinism and other diluted heresies from the Deformation of the 16th century that were never taught in Christ’s church until that time

f) It teaches devotion to the saints, devotion to the Blessed Virgin Mary, prayer for the dead, the real presence of the Eucharist, all in line with the ECF’s

g) The Early Church Fathers attest to the pope’s authority and final judgments as binding

h) The Bible was canonized and edited and assembled by the Catholic Church and the Holy Trinity was decided upon by the Catholic Church as official dogma. The Creeds of Athanasius and Niceaea were Catholic, the idea that re-baptism is unnecessary if done in the trinitarian formula is a Catholic teaching.

i) The Catholic Church teaches the real presence of the Eucharist consistent with the ECFs, councils, Scripture, and tradition

j) The Church teaches a holistic faith based on the forementioned Scripture, Tradition, Reason, and Magisterium. They do not just teach a sola scriptura individualistic approach that leads to chaos

 

[gurneyhalleck1]

CONTINUED…

k) The Church has lated 2,000 years and was created and started by Christ Jesus, not Martin Luther, Zwingli, Knox, Calvin, Bucer, Cranmer, Wesley or any other individual flawed human being

L) The apparitions of Mary and our Lord have happened largely within a Catholic context ie: the Miraculous Medal, Fatima, the Sacred Heart, the visions of Sister Anne Catherine Emmerich, Lordes, Padre Pio, and a host of others.

M) Eucharistic miracles abound in the Catholic world and in Catholic history

You will call “skewed” or “flawed” or “humorous” anything you don’t agree with, Ambassador. Now, for something new and unprecedented from you, why don’t you actually tell us what YOU believe in rather than just bashing my faith. God bless…I can’t wait to finally hear YOUR beliefs…I think? :coffeeread::hypno:

Again, this is an inductive argument at best. You make your assertions with such confidence, and this is very amusing. Yet your assertions do not take into consideration a true evaluation of the whole. They are based only upon a skewed and partial view of that which calls itself Protestantism.

If my definition of catholicism was “that which constitutes each and every professing catholic I know,” then the inevitable conslusion that I would draw is that catholicism is not only unbiblical, but also full of divorce, sexual immorality, murder, and blanket idolatry.

My best approach to the situation is not to form my own definition of what true catholicim is (*based upon my own incomplete and uninformed observations * ) but to allow the catholic apologists themselves to define and defend it according to the official standards of their church. I must allow the leading proponents of your church to define who is and who is not a true catholic before I even attempt to make my assessment of catholicism. This is exactly what you should do with respect to protestantism.

But the whole point of our conversing is to establish what constitutes the true church.

And so I ask you: How do you know that your church is the true church?

 

[Stephen168]

My whole point was that just because certain professing Protestant denominations have crumbled into heresy and false religion, this proves nothing against Protestantism as a whole.

Protestantism as a whole? Interesting.

 

[Stephen168]

I must allow the leading proponents of your church to define who is and who is not a true catholic before I even attempt to make my assessment of catholicism. This is exactly what you should do with respect to protestantism.

Who are ‘the leading proponents’ of Protestantism?

 

[Yerusalyim]

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.