"The gates of hell shall not prevail"

  • Thread starter Thread starter TheHolyGhost
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
The gates of hell shall not prevail"
There are two ways to understand this promise
Firstly that the Church founded by Jesus Christ and entrusted to Peter will
never e defeated by its enemies
and Secondly , the gates of a city were its chief defense
So if the gates of hell will not prevail surely that means that the Church will
win an offensive war , driving back evil . or as my sister used to say
"the best method of defense is attack "
 
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
The gates of Hell can NEVER prevail otherwise it would mean Christ lied.
 
TheHolyGhost #5
However, I still cant see how Christ has promised to keep the Church pure in understanding faith and morals infallibly when from the very beginning it almost seemed like morality was non existent.
What can’t you see in Christ’s mandate to His Church which He built?

All four promises to Peter alone:
“You are Peter and on this rock I will build My Church.” (Mt 16:18)
“The gates of hell will not prevail against it.”(Mt 16:18)
I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of heaven." ( Mt 16:19)
“Whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven.” (Mt 16:19) [Later to the Twelve].

Sole authority:
“Strengthen your brethren.” (Lk 22:32)
“Feed My sheep.”(Jn 21:17).

Thus was His Catholic Church founded.
Don’t you know that Peter led the meeting which elected the first successor to an Apostle ( Acts 1:13-26). Peter preached the first sermon at Pentecost (Acts 2:14), and received the first converts (Acts 2:4 1). Peter performed the first miracle after Pentecost (Acts 3:6-7), inflicted the first punishment upon Ananias and Saphira (Acts 5:1-11), and excommunicated the first heretic Simon the magician (Acts 8:2 1).

Thus the reality that heretics and miscreants are first punished by the first Vicar of Christ, St Peter, reinforces the faith and the morality evident in the Church Herself.

Where is your mirage of non-existent morality?
 
Their laws were brutal, but just
“Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock.” (Psalm 137:9)

I’m not really sure of the context of this verse. I am sure this needs to be explained to me.
 
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
We know because the historical facts testify to it. The Church still teaches the same doctrines it did in the first century: the Eucharist, the necessity of confession, the reality of purgatory, all the way down to the Church’s moral teaching on things like contraception; all of these things have been a part of the Catholic Church’s teaching since the very beginning.

In regards to the other churches, they are clearly not the Church established by Christ: Christ only established one Church and that Church is clearly (when one reads the history) the Catholic Church. The “gates of hell” have, in a sense, prevailed over those other churches (no offense meant to our Protestant brethren in saying so), in the sense that they have lost some of the moral truths that the Church teaches and thus have become accepting of certain things which are mortally sinful, and thus put souls in jeopardy. The prime example is the case of contraception, which has been condemned by the Catholic Church since the first century, a stance which was followed by virtually every branch of Christianity until the 1930s when the Anglican Church first accepted its use; every other Protestant sect shortly followed suit. Contraception is a mortal sin, and all mortal sins are “gates to hell,” in a sense. In that first storm of the sexual revolution, only the Catholic Church withstood this assault on truth.

Equally important is the uniquely Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation; the true presence of Christ in the Eucharist. The Eucharist is vital to the spiritual life. As Jesus said, “If you do not eat my flesh and drink my blood, you have no life within you.”

Again, none of this is said to slight our Protestant friends or suggest that they do not have a real relationship with Our Lord, but it does no one any favors to sugarcoat our understanding of the truth. The Catholic Church is the Church Christ established and it is the only Church that has preserved the fullness of the truth He taught.
Islam and Hinduism have huge followings and they are not joined to our Church at all. To them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.
Islam and Hinduism are not monolithic organizations. There are countless forms of “Hinduism”, with no definitive set of teachings or doctrines. Islam is more organized, but there is still no central Islamic authority.
Or is Christs promise in regards to guarding the Church from heresy? However, I still cant see how Christ has promised to keep the Church pure in understanding faith and morals infallibly when from the very beginning it almost seemed like morality was non existent.
Yes, it is in regards to both heresy and dissolution.

Morality has never been non-existent. Morality is a system of timeless truths, all of which the Catholic Church has taught from the beginning of its existence. The failure of its members to practice these teachings does nothing to take away from the fact that the Church has always taught them.
 
Morality has never been non-existent. Morality is a system of timeless truths, all of which the Catholic Church has taught from the beginning of its existence. The failure of its members to practice these teachings does nothing to take away from the fact that the Church has always taught them.
Thanks for your reply. I do agree about morality being a system of timeless truths and they are all absolute and are assigned moral or immoral for a reason and not randomly and they are true for everyone at any given time.

How then could the Lord have said to Moses to kill? Not to defend, not to engage in a just war, but to kill. Either the Lord commanded something that is contrary to His merciful, loving nature and His commandment or Moses just claimed that the Lord told him to do so to justify killing. In either scenario, it would already appear that the gates of hell have prevailed long before the Church; either that God is not good and not unchangeable or that Moses lied and from the very beginning and our understanding of truth is distorted.
 
Thanks for your reply. I do agree about morality being a system of timeless truths and they are all absolute and are assigned moral or immoral for a reason and not randomly and they are true for everyone at any given time.

How then could the Lord have said to Moses to kill? Not to defend, not to engage in a just war, but to kill. Either the Lord commanded something that is contrary to His merciful, loving nature and His commandment or Moses just claimed that the Lord told him to do so to justify killing. In either scenario, it would already appear that the gates of hell have prevailed long before the Church; either that God is not good and not unchangeable or that Moses lied and from the very beginning and our understanding of truth is distorted.
Or perhaps in matters of infinite knowledge like God has, the killing was justified and part if his infinitely good plan.

Sorry but you are in no place to judge God’s actions.

Consider if they had not, maybe those evil people would kill them, take over as the foundation for humanity,

What could our world look like today. Think of the scariest most horrific world imagine able where people act as animals and kill constantly. No safety or security.

Could that be a scenario that was avoided by God killing everyone in the flood, or commanding the destruction of Jericho?

Only God knows, but the point being you are in no position to judge whether or not God acted against his nature.
 
Or perhaps in matters of infinite knowledge like God has, the killing was justified and part if his infinitely good plan.

Sorry but you are in no place to judge God’s actions.
I’m not judging God’s actions. I’m just judging the actions, based on the commandments and morality He’s given and what the Church teaches, and it would appear to be contradictory.
Consider if they had not, maybe those evil people would kill them, take over as the foundation for humanity,

What could our world look like today. Think of the scariest most horrific world imagine able where people act as animals and kill constantly. No safety or security.
God could have allowed a just war in defense of the Jewish people. Self defense is perfectly fine. Or God could have done something similar to The Flood again where He Himself was the sole taker of life.
Only God knows, but the point being you are in no position to judge whether or not God acted against his nature.
God is love itself. He desires all souls to be saved. God says do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. To love our enemies. To forgive.

How can He say to kill enemies with all that He has said beforehand? It seems contradictory. It seems unlike Him.

I may not be in any position to judge, but I can certainly observe and have questions.
 
=TheHolyGhost;11342961]“Happy those who seize your children and smash them against a rock.” (Psalm 137:9)
I’m not really sure of the context of this verse. I am sure this needs to be explained to me.
Here from Haydocks catholic Commentary:

http://haydock1859.tripod.com/

Ver. 9. “Dash thy little ones, &c. In the spiritual sense, we dash the little ones of Babylon against the rock, when we mortify our passions, and stifle the first motions of them, by a speedy recourse to the rock, which is Christ. (Challoner) (St. Augustine) (St. Gregory) (Psalm l.) (Worthington) — We do not read that Cyrus treated Babylon with this rigour; but such practices were then customary, (Osee xiv. 1.; Homer, Iliad xxii.) and Darius cruelly punished the revolted city. (Herodotus iii. 159.) (Calmet) — God will reward those who execute his decrees (Haydock) against Babylon. (Worthington) — The psalmist contrasts the felicity of the conqueror, with the misery of the citizens, without approving of his conduct.”

God Bless you!
patrick
 
I’m not judging God’s actions. I’m just judging the actions, based on the commandments and morality He’s given and what the Church teaches, and it would appear to be contradictory.

God could have allowed a just war in defense of the Jewish people. Self defense is perfectly fine. Or God could have done something similar to The Flood again where He Himself was the sole taker of life.

God is love itself. He desires all souls to be saved. God says do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good. To love our enemies. To forgive.

How can He say to kill enemies with all that He has said beforehand? It seems contradictory. It seems unlike Him.

I may not be in any position to judge, but I can certainly observe and have questions.
The church does not just teach self defense. It has a just war doctrine.

For example, it was not self defense, nor was the United States attacked by the Germans in World War 2. Yet, we fought against Hitler’s evil and atrocities by entering the war and offensively taking action.

Likewise the Biblical conquests.

Does that make sense?

Further you should see no difference between God taking life in the Flood, and God using humans under his authority and protection to carry out his will. Throughout history God has asked his human creation to participate in his plans.

Whether it be naming the animals in the garden, setting up the temple, using moses to communicate with Pharaoh, sending Christ his son, utilizing the priest for confession, etc…

God can just snap his fingers, but it is fitting and just and good, that he enters into communion with us. At times this has looked like killing and destroying nations.

you also must remember that it was a very very different time. and you really need to try to enter into the view of what it might have looked like then, and the social norms.

Also, Christ came and gave us a new covenant, a new practice. He did not contradict the old testament law, but elevated it and fulfilled it and showed us a new way. It was the perfect time in human history for him to do this and in accordance with what God wanted. Just as the old testament (seemingly brutal passages) were exactly what was needed at that time for God to ensure his beautiful creation did not destroy itself.
 
The gates of Hell can NEVER prevail otherwise it would mean Christ lied.
It really depends on what the author meant by ‘prevail’ One could look at current times and assume most people will probably not make it to heaven, so if this ends up being true, and 95% of people end up in hell, and only 5% make it heaven, it would seem, in this regard satan/hell, HAS prevailed, or won over more souls that God created.

However I believe it probably means Satan/Hell will not prevail against God himself, in the final battle that is, but again, If Satan ends up with more souls, it would seem he has won and achieved his goal, to destroy the majority of Gods creation and turn them against their creator.
 
It really depends on what the author meant by ‘prevail’ One could look at current times and assume most people will probably not make it to heaven, so if this ends up being true, and 95% of people end up in hell, and only 5% make it heaven, it would seem, in this regard satan/hell, HAS prevailed, or won over more souls that God created.

However I believe it probably means Satan/Hell will not prevail against God himself, in the final battle that is, but again, If Satan ends up with more souls, it would seem he has won and achieved his goal, to destroy the majority of Gods creation and turn them against their creator.
You are Peter, and upon this Rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell will not prevail against it.

It means the Church Christ founded, the Christian movement would never fail and would always be there to enforce things like Matt 18, to uphold and teach the truth. Whether there is one person in the church or 1.2 billion, if the church exists, and maintains the apostolic tradition as she does, the gates of hell have not prevailed.
 
What mikekle should know is that as God has created mankind with free-will, as well as re-opening heaven to us after the Fall through the suffering and crucifixion of His Son Jesus (the Redemption), only those who follow their conscience and take the trouble to try form it and try to seek God will be open to salvation.
 
=mikekle;11343733]It really depends on what the author meant by ‘prevail’ One could look at current times and assume most people will probably not make it to heaven, so if this ends up being true, and 95% of people end up in hell, and only 5% make it heaven, it would seem, in this regard satan/hell, HAS prevailed, or won over more souls that God created.
However I believe it probably means Satan/Hell will not prevail against God himself, in the final battle that is, but again, If Satan ends up with more souls, it would seem he has won and achieved his goal, to destroy the majority of Gods creation and turn them against their creator.
My young friend, PLEASE do not attempt to tell God what he means.

READ the following:
Mt. 10:1-8
Mt. 16:15-19
John 17:14-20
Mk. 16:14-15
Mt. 28:16-20

And discover that ONLY the CC is founded, guided and protected by Christ Personally:thumbsup:

That my dear friend is WHY all MUST listen to and accept FULLY what She teaches. Amen

Patrick
 
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
The “gates of hell” refers to the demonic forces of hell. In the time of walled cities gates were built into the walls to alloweasy egress. But they also were a defensive weakness so they were well protected and defended. So too gates played a role in any offensive actions by the inhabitants of the city for it was through its gates that counterattacks were launched. The passage refers to the mission of the church as given it by Christ at the Great Commissioning. The Church was to preach the Good News, the Gospel. In doing so it would be challenged by the forces of hell. The only way that the forces of hell could prevail is if the church ever taught error. That has never happened for the Catholic Church but it has for all other christian denominations. For 500 years mainline protestant denominations have tried to come up with just one example where the Church taught error. They never could do it. The mainline denominations do not even try anymore. Some of the pentecostal and evangelical groups make accusations but any investigation into their allegations quickly shows their error. That is to be expected though. After all, Jesus said it would never happen.
 
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
We know only in faith, trusting in Jesus’ promise that the gates of hell would not prevail.

It is not the following of the Church, but rather the fidelity of the Church to all that Jesus taught, its continuing to keep the faith it has believed from the earliest days. As St. Vincent of Lerins said, we believe quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus credituni est (“what has been believed everywhere, always, and by all”).

It is in the faith of the successors of Peter–even when some did not personally believe the Catholic Faith, they did not make official pronouncements against it.

But in the end, it is only at the end that we can be sure. It is only by looking back from eternity that we can see how the gates of hell did not prevail, just as it is only when we reach heaven that we can personally be sure that we “made it.” Before that point, we are working on faith, not knowledge.
 
How do we know that the gates of hell have not prevailed?

Just because the Church has a following does not mean the gates have not prevailed. Several other Churches that are in error have not gone away and to them, the gates of hell have not prevailed either.

So how do we know?
What is Hell? Who created it…

Do you think God created Hell? If so, show me a verse that says God created Hell?

So many talk as if they know these things but really ask yourself what you actually know about hell… This will help you find the answer to your OP
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top