Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The text means just what it say's. Check the Greek. Let's look at it.
πυλαι<4439> [GATES] αδου<86> ου<3756> [OF HADES]
4439 **** poo'-lay apparently a primary word; a gate, i.e. the leaf or wing of a folding entrance (literally or figuratively):--gate.
86 haides hah'-dace from 1 (as negative particle) and 1492; properly, unseen, i.e. "Hades" or the place (state) of departed souls:--grave, hell. see GREEK for 1 see GREEK for 1492
Okay, up to this point we agree to the letter. The gates of Hell was the entrance to the realm where the souls of the dead resided. (I'm actually kind of surprised that we're in agreement up to this point.)
Quote:
I see it saying that the church shall not enter death or depart from the way Jesus established it.
And I see it as saying that even death shall stop the power of Christ's gospel.
Quote:
I believe we have the church built upon the foundation of those original Apostles and Prophets and the cornerstone of Jesus Christ. All of which is not replaced but remains as the foundation upon which the church is built and it shall never cease to exist just as Jesus established it, no matter how small or hard to find it may become during the attacks of Rome and others.
And here is where we disagree. When the last of the apostles died, I believe they foundation upon which Christ built His church was no longer in a position to support it. It fell into disrepair, so to speak. There are four individuals named in the scriptures as apostles following the original twelve. Clearly, in the early years of the Church, vacancies were filled within the group as they came about, continuing to keep the foundation strong. Paul said that this is how Christ established His Church and how it was to continue operating. That's what I believe.
Quote:
Since the Church is not a building or organization but it is the people, if there were Christians then there was the Church just as Jesus established. You see your looking to a man made organization as though it is the church when that is not what Jesus built.
I disagree, balunman. I believe that Jesus Christ established an organization that was led by Peter and the other apostles He personally chose. Under them, the Church functioned in such a way that the doctrinal purity of His teachings would not be compromised. It is only with the existence of apostles that this could be the case. Once each congregation was free to interpret doctrine as it chose and to ordain leaders as it chose, the apostasy Paul so vigorously warned about started to take place. When you look at the Church as it existed in the Dark Ages, you cannot fail to see the corruption and lack of authorized leadership. You have high-ranking church positions being bought, and political deals being cut that crossed over into the governing of the Church. Not exactly the Church Christ established.
I see both a non-institutional Church and an institutional Church, but I realize you see only the one (the non-institutional Church) as having any validity. Trouble is, we as Christians are certainly not united in our faith, are we?
With respect specifically to Christ's statement that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church he intended to establish, we believe that when He visited the spirits in prison during the three days during which His body lay in the tomb and preached His gospel to those wicked who had died prior to His ministry, He was opening the door for this work to continue. As you may or may not know, my Church teaches that even now, people who died without even having had the opportunity to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ during their lifetimes are hearing it now as they await the resurrection, still in the spirit prison (hell, or "Hades") but able to be freed from it when they hear and accept the gospel. Thus, even the gates of hell have not prevailed against Christ's Church.
I know you will disagree, and that's fine. At least I'm pretty sure at this point that we can have a civil conversation on the topic. (Actually, though, we're kind of getting off the topic of the OP.)
Interesting. I would like to point out that the passage refers to a conflict between the church and the forces of darkness.
Very few forces take their city gates to an offensive campaign.
It appears to me that it means that the forces of darkness will not withstand the assault of the church, that the gates of Hell will be broken down. What could that mean?
Interesting. I would like to point out that the passage refers to a conflict between the church and the forces of darkness.
Actually, that's not what the phrase "the gates of hell" would have meant to Christ's apostles when He used it. It has come to be thought of by many Christians today to refer to "the forces of darkness," but in the context of 1st century Judeo-Christian culture, this would not have been the case.
Well, it does indicate a strong place like a walled city which would be defended against an assault.
I'm sorry, but how does it indicate that? That's not what the phrase "the gates of hell" would have meant to Christ's apostles or to any 1st century Jewish convert to Christianity. The gates of hell were literally believed to be the entrance to the underworld, hell, Hades, or the realm of the departed who awaited their resurrection and judgment.
I'm sorry, but how does it indicate that? That's not what the phrase "the gates of hell" would have meant to Christ's apostles or to any 1st century Jewish convert to Christianity. The gates of hell were literally believed to be the entrance to the underworld, hell, Hades, or the realm of the departed who awaited their resurrection and judgment.
If one would care to notice ... the phrase "the gates of hell will not prevail" would show who is on the defensive and who is on the offensive. The truth of God is that his Word will and has never ... never ... never got to point that it needed to be re-established because of some prevailing circumstance. In other words ... the Truth of God is on the offensive and hell itself will not prevail.
The Church is built not on humans like Peter, but on Christ that Peter confessed to:
Matthew 16:18 And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not overcome it.
1 Corinthians 10:3-4 They all ate the same spiritual food and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
God revealed in the Scriptures that every prophet who thought evil had some how prevailed against the truth was told they were wrong in their assessment. And the distinguishing factor between the true prophet of God who hears vs the false prophet is that fact ... the false prophet (modern or not) comes along with the lie that somehow, someway evil has prevailed in someway that required God to regroup or reorganize and they just happen to be the person whom God chosen to do it.
Prophets that make such claims and people who follow such prophets are neither followers of God nor Christian.
Last edited by twin.spin; 06-23-2013 at 09:39 PM..
pre·vail (pr-vl) intr.v.pre·vailed, pre·vail·ing, pre·vails1. To be greater in strength or influence; triumph: prevailed against the enemy. 2. To be or become effective; win out: hoped justice would prevail. 3. To be most common or frequent; be predominant: a region where snow and ice prevail. 4. To be in force, use, or effect; be current: an ancient tradition that still prevails. 5. To use persuasion or inducement successfully. Often used with on, upon, or with. See Synonyms at persuade.
To me, the fact that the gates of hell (i.e. the entrance to the underworld, hell or Hades) would not prevail against the Church Christ said He would build implies that death (the time at which a person's spirit passes through these gates) would not prevail against that person receiving the gospel, as the gospel would continue to be taught in this realm. Incidentally, this belief was very common during the first and second centuries after Christ. I can cite several examples from early Christian sources if you'd like me to.
pre·vail (pr-vl) intr.v.pre·vailed, pre·vail·ing, pre·vails1. To be greater in strength or influence; triumph: prevailed against the enemy. 2. To be or become effective; win out: hoped justice would prevail. 3. To be most common or frequent; be predominant: a region where snow and ice prevail. 4. To be in force, use, or effect; be current: an ancient tradition that still prevails. 5. To use persuasion or inducement successfully. Often used with on, upon, or with. See Synonyms at persuade.
To me, the fact that the gates of hell (i.e. the entrance to the underworld, hell or Hades) would not prevail against the Church Christ said He would build implies that death (the time at which a person's spirit passes through these gates) would not prevail against that person receiving the gospel, as the gospel would continue to be taught in this realm. Incidentally, this belief was very common during the first and second centuries after Christ. I can cite several examples from early Christian sources if you'd like me to.
Okay, up to this point we agree to the letter. The gates of Hell was the entrance to the realm where the souls of the dead resided. (I'm actually kind of surprised that we're in agreement up to this point.)
And I see it as saying that even death shall stop the power of Christ's gospel.
And here is where we disagree. When the last of the apostles died, I believe they foundation upon which Christ built His church was no longer in a position to support it. It fell into disrepair, so to speak. There are four individuals named in the scriptures as apostles following the original twelve. Clearly, in the early years of the Church, vacancies were filled within the group as they came about, continuing to keep the foundation strong. Paul said that this is how Christ established His Church and how it was to continue operating. That's what I believe.
Just as the cornerstone of the foundation, once set needed no replacement, so the entire foundation once laid remains just as is as the building is built upon it. Just because Jesus left the earth did not remove the cornerstone part of the foundation just as the death of the 12 Apostles did not remove any part of the foundation laid once for all.
Now I do realize that once Paul is called as the Apostle to the Gentiles (not of the 12 that were called for Israel) you see the term Apostle used in that new ministry. But they are not the same as Paul teaches as the 12. In fact you see that the same 12 appear again in Revelations in the new city.
And I know you must disagree with that. So there we are. You see only the Roman church and I agree if that were the only church that you could claim the church Jesus Christ built had ceased to exist but I know they were not the church not the only church. The church of Jesus Christ has always existed since He built it and remains til this day.
Quote:
I disagree, balunman. I believe that Jesus Christ established an organization that was led by Peter and the other apostles He personally chose. Under them, the Church functioned in such a way that the doctrinal purity of His teachings would not be compromised. It is only with the existence of apostles that this could be the case. Once each congregation was free to interpret doctrine as it chose and to ordain leaders as it chose, the apostasy Paul so vigorously warned about started to take place. When you look at the Church as it existed in the Dark Ages, you cannot fail to see the corruption and lack of authorized leadership. You have high-ranking church positions being bought, and political deals being cut that crossed over into the governing of the Church. Not exactly the Church Christ established.
I don't believe Jesus ever set up a hierarchy in the Church.
Quote:
I see both a non-institutional Church and an institutional Church, but I realize you see only the one (the non-institutional Church) as having any validity. Trouble is, we as Christians are certainly not united in our faith, are we?
With respect specifically to Christ's statement that the gates of hell would not prevail against the Church he intended to establish, we believe that when He visited the spirits in prison during the three days during which His body lay in the tomb and preached His gospel to those wicked who had died prior to His ministry, He was opening the door for this work to continue. As you may or may not know, my Church teaches that even now, people who died without even having had the opportunity to hear the gospel of Jesus Christ during their lifetimes are hearing it now as they await the resurrection, still in the spirit prison (hell, or "Hades") but able to be freed from it when they hear and accept the gospel. Thus, even the gates of hell have not prevailed against Christ's Church.
I know you will disagree, and that's fine. At least I'm pretty sure at this point that we can have a civil conversation on the topic. (Actually, though, we're kind of getting off the topic of the OP.)
Yes we disagree on this. I do not believe the church Jesus built needed restoring.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
-v
l
)
