• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Luke 23:43 and "Descending into Hell"

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
In the Apostle's Creed, it is acknowledged that Jesus descended into hell. Yet in Luke 23:43 Jesus tells the thief "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise." This is something I have wondered about for sometime, how do these things fit together? I figured my Reformed friends could help me out.....:thumbsup:
 

seekingpurity047

Why am I not surprised
Apr 12, 2005
3,303
148
39
Brooklin
✟4,248.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
CA-Conservatives
Well... Jesus did go to Paradise, which can also be known as Abraham's bosom. This place was the place for the righteous (ie. Abraham, Moses, David, etc.) It was sorta like... pre-heaven. Jesus went there to get all of the righteous people out and bring them to heaven (in other words, "raise" them up). For He is the resurrection.

Now, Abraham's bosom, aka Paradise, is empty. By Jesus' resurrection, the righteous (those that live by faith Rom. 1:17) can go directly to heaven when they die. Sheol, on the other hand, the bad part of Hades (sorta like... pre-hell) still exists. One cannot, however, get out of Sheol. This is one place where catholics can sorta (though inaccurately) get their purgatory idea... but let's not talk about that. Sheol, to translate it better into english, is generally called "the side of the pit", which means that it's next to hell, but not hell itself. Read Rev. 21. Hell is empty right now, but everything and everyone in sheol will then be put into hell "this is the second death".

Yah... I think that's it... if someone needs to correct me, feel free. I may be sorta in error... but yah... i wish i could draw an illustration, it'd be a lot easier to explain that way.

To the glory of God,

Randy
 
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Interesting posts so far, thank you. I read through the John Calvin link, which was very informative, and I think that goes along with the place where Christ commands his disciples not to touch him because he hasn't been with the Father after his resurrection (not sure where that is right off hand). Anyway, do we know anything about that 'paradise' that would fit with what Calvin states?
 
Upvote 0
H

HamletsChoice

Guest
Defcon said:
Interesting posts so far, thank you. I read through the John Calvin link, which was very informative, and I think that goes along with the place where Christ commands his disciples not to touch him because he hasn't been with the Father after his resurrection (not sure where that is right off hand). Anyway, do we know anything about that 'paradise' that would fit with what Calvin states?

But it seems that Calvin did not address that important counter-argument verse that you initially brought up "To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." What is a good refutation of that verse?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Defcon
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
HamletsChoice said:
But it seems that Calvin did not address that important counter-argument verse that you initially brought up "To day shalt thou be with me in paradise." What is a good refutation of that verse?
Well, that's a good point and if you notice I haven't tried to ignore that verse as it still causes some problems. What I particularly liked about the Calvin explanation was that Christ couldn't have only suffered a physical death on the cross to truly have taken on God's full wrath meant to us. That being said - I don't think Calvin came out and said - at least not in that link - that Christ was in hell for 3 days. So I am still looking for the answer as to how all this fits together. The "Sheol" aspect or Abraham's bosom needs a little more meat for me to understand and apply this doctrine.

Hopefully this thread will get some more responses because this is something that I am very curious about....................:scratch:
 
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
This is weird the more and more I look at it - John 20:17 'Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' "
Yet Jesus said to the thief that he would be in paradise today....????
I'm confused. I think what I liked about the Calvin link was that it dealt with Christ's spiritual death (which I knew happened, just hadn't read anything in depth about it) but he doesn't address these verses and how they fit. Anyone that can help with this?
 
Upvote 0

Imblessed

Reformed Baptist with a Quaker heritage
Aug 8, 2004
2,007
111
53
Ohio
✟25,256.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I wish I could help out, but it's something I've never truly understood either. Maybe someone will help out! I hope.

This is akin to the question I put out about Matthew 27(where the saints left their graves and went into the city after Jesus' ressurection). Also something never really explained to my satisfaction.....

Both are questions that we may never really "know" the answer to.....
 
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
I thought as I researched this on my own, it may help to post what I've found - here is an explanation I have found that seems to make sense....

Source: http://www.muslimhope.com/AnsweringMuslimBibleObjections2.htm

Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?
(a) Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43).
(b) No. He said to Mary Magdalene two days later, "I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John 20:17).
A: You have to understand Christian theology to answer this. Paradise and Heaven are different places. Apocryphal literature shows that the audience Jesus spoke to, the Jews, understood there to be two compartments in the afterlife: prison and paradise. Paradise, also called Abraham’s bosom in Luke 16:22, is where the godly people went prior to Jesus’ time until Jesus rose from the dead. After Jesus descended and declared victory over Satan, He ascended to heaven leading captives [of death] in His train (Ephesians 4:8), and all the people who followed God in times prior to Jesus went to Heaven with Jesus.


 
Upvote 0

Imblessed

Reformed Baptist with a Quaker heritage
Aug 8, 2004
2,007
111
53
Ohio
✟25,256.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
so basically he spend 3 days in "paradise",( which was the part of sheol where the righteous went) and preached to them. After this they all went to heaven, and paradise is now empty. The only part of sheol being used is the bad side, where the unrighteous go and await to be thrown into hell after the ressurection.......

But Jesus himself did not go into heaven until after His ascention(40 days later)?

am i getting this right?
 
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Imblessed said:
so basically he spend 3 days in "paradise",( which was the part of sheol where the righteous went) and preached to them. After this they all went to heaven, and paradise is now empty. The only part of sheol being used is the bad side, where the unrighteous go and await to be thrown into hell after the ressurection.......

But Jesus himself did not go into heaven until after His ascention(40 days later)?

am i getting this right?
That is the way I understand it at this point - yes. In that way; for the three days that Christ was buried in the tomb; He did not go to Heaven and therefore was accurate when He stated that He had not been to His Father in the gospel of John. So I think you and I are on the same wavelength here - can anyone give us further assurance or correct our error in this?
 
Upvote 0

Jon_

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,998
91
43
California
✟26,116.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Now, I will readily admit that hell, heaven, and end times are not my strongest subjects. While I do assent and recognize that their place in the Bible obliges us to learn what God has revealed to us concerning them, I cannot help but feel the matter of investigating the significance of all these things to be markedly less important than others. Therefore, I know as little as the next, and will rely upon the Spirit of God for illumination, and the writings of the godly men come before us for their wise insights.

I think the most important place to start is with a word study of the significant words in focus. These are the Hebrew Sheol, and the Greek Hades, and Gehenna. Let us first examine the New Testament words.

It is very important to understand the distinction between Hades and Gehenna. That this distinction exists in the Bible is no accident, of course. Of the 11 occurances of Hades in the KJV, 10 of them are translated hell, as opposed to the Analytical-Literal Translation, which never translates it as hell. The Literal Translation is divided between the two, having 6 Hades and 5 hell. One instance of Hades being translated hell is when Jesus refers to Is. 14:13, 15 in Luke 10:15. The passage in Isaiah has Sheol. Also in Luke 16:23, where the rich man sees Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham. Here, the rich man is said to be in hell (Hades). In Rev. 20:13, 14, the LITV has death (Gr. thanatos) and hell (Gr. Hades). Thus, it reads "death and hell gave up the dead," where the ALT has "death and the realm of the dead gave up the dead."

Sheol is translated "hell," "grave," or "pit." My understanding is that it is translated Hades in the Septuagint (LXX), which is the term used for the place of the dead or where souls go upon death, as opposed to Gehenna, which is hell, that is, eternal fire. Gehenna comes from the Hebrew phrase meaning "Valley of Hinnom," which is the valley outside the Gate of Hinnom in Jerusalem where all the garbage was dumped. Fires burned there continuously in an effort to dispose of the filth and to keep the smell surpressed. This is what is commonly expressed as being what we consider "hell" (everlasting fire). Intestingly, this "version" of hell is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament. Their understanding of hell was limited to Sheol, which is the underworld, the place of the dead.

In Acts 2:27 and 2:31, the ALT has "realm of the dead" and the LITV has "Hades," which means "realm of the dead." Both of these verses are quotations of Psalm 16:10.
(Psalm 16:10 LITV) For You will not leave My soul in Sheol; You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption.
In the Psalm, David uses Sheol. The LXX translates Hades in this verse. On this passage, John Gill says this.
Meaning, not in the place of the damned, where Christ never went, nor was; for at his death his soul was committed to his Father, and was the same day in paradise: but rather, "sheol" here, as "hades" in the New Testament, signifies the state of the dead, the separate state of souls after death, the invisible world of souls, where Christ's soul was; though it was not left there, nor did it continue, but on the third day returned to its body again. (John Gill, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Ps. 16:10).
Adam Clarke also makes some observations concerning this passage.
As to leaving the soul In hell, it can only mean permitting the life of the Messiah to continue under the power of death; for sheol signifies a pit, a ditch, the grave, or state of the dead. . . . All human beings see corruption, because born in sin, and liable to the curse. The human body of Jesus Christ, as being without sin, saw no corruption. (Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible, Ps. 16:10).
And, we should also consider Keil & Delitzch:
[That] which the apostle in the above passage [1 Th. 5:23] desires for his readers in respect of all three parts of their being, David here expresses as a confident expectation; for [it] implies that he also hopes for his body that which he hopes for his spirit-life centred in the heart, and for his soul raised to dignity both by the work of creation and of grace. He looks death calmly and triumphantly in the face, even his flesh shall dwell or lie securely, viz., without being seized with trembling at its approaching corruption. David's hope rests on this conclusion: it is impossible for the man, who, in appropriating faith and actual experience, calls God his own, to fall into the hands of death. For Ps. 16:10 shows, that what is here thought of in connection with . . . dwelling in safety under the divine protection (Dt. 33:12, 28, cf. Prov. 3:24), is preservation from death. . . . Ps. 16:10 - where to see the grave (Ps. 49:10), equivalent to, to succumb to the state of the grave, i.e., death (Ps. 89:49; Luke 2:26; John 8:51) is the opposite of "seeing life," i.e., experiencing and enjoying it (Ecc. 9:9, John 3:36), the sense of sight being used as the noblest of the senses to denote the sensus communis, i.e., the common sense lying at the basis of all feeling and perception, and figuratively of all active and passive experience (Psychol. S. 234; tr. p. 276) - shows, that what is said here is not intended of an abandonment by which, having once come under the power of death, there is no coming forth again (Böttcher). It is therefore the hope of not dying, that is expressed by David in Ps. 16:10. for by [Holy One] David means himself. [Note: And of course, David prophesied the future fulfillment of this in Christ Jesus as evidenced in Acts 2:27, 31.] (Keil & Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Ps. 16:10).
We see a unifying understanding of the passage taking shape, viz. that by hell (Sheol) David meant death or the realm of the dead, i.e. the underworld. With this understanding of the original verse, it behooves us to turn to the New Testament citation and to attempt to understand it in context with its Old Testament basis.
(Acts 2:27, 31 KJV) Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Here, the word translated "hell" is Hades. Before we look into the verse in greater detail, it would be fitting to read A. T. Robertson's comments on the word Hades.
Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. . . . It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary). The ancient pagans divided Hades (a privative and idein, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham’s bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. Luke 16:25). Christ was in Hades (Acts 2:27, Acts 2:31), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the ‘gates of Hades’ (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Is. 38:10; Wisd. 16:3; 3 Maccabees 5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also Ps. 9:13; Ps. 107:18; Job. 38:17. . . . (Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament, Matt. 16:18).
From this premise, his comments on Acts 2:27 become more clear.
Hades is the unseen world, Hebrew Sheol, but here it is viewed as death itself "considered as a rapacious destroyer" (Hackett). It does not mean the place of punishment, though both heaven and the place of torment are in Hades (Luke 16:23). "Death and Hades are strictly parallel terms: he who is dead is in Hades" (Page). The use of eis here = en is common enough. The Textus Receptus here reads eis Haidou (genitive case) like the Attic idiom with domon (abode) understood. "Hades" in English is not translation, but transliteration. The phrase in the Apostles’ Creed, "descended into hell" is from this passage in Acts (Hades, not Gehenna). The English word "hell" is Anglo-Saxon from helan, to hide, and was used in the Authorized Version to translate both Hades as here and Gehenna as in Matt. 5:22. (ibid. Acts 2:27).
Albert Barnes entreats this same verse masterfully, and I would quote him at length were he not so lengthy. Instead, I will give his two footnotes concerning common misunderstandings drawn from this verse.
That nothing is affirmed here about the destination of the human soul of Christ after his death. That he went to the region of the dead is implied, but nothing further. It may be remarked that the Scriptures affirm nothing about the state of his soul in that time which intervened between his death and resurrection. The only intimation which occurs on the subject is such as to leave us to suppose that he was in a state of happiness. To the dying thief he said, "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise." When Jesus died, he said, "It is finished"; and he doubtless meant by that that his sufferings and toils for man’s redemption were at an end. All suppositions of any toils or pains after his death are fables, and without the slightest warrant in the New Testament. (Albert Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, Acts 2:27).
The full text of his comments can be viewed here: http://www.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=ac&chapter=002.

Thus, the resolution of this matter is that Christ did indeed die, which is inferred from his descending to Hades, where the souls of the dead go. Of course, Christ really did have to die for our sins, for this is the threat made to Adam by God and he must be true to his word. Only Christ's true death would suffice as propiation, and Jesus's descent into Hades was proof of that. Hades does not refer to Gehenna, that is, hell, which is the place of eternal torment. That place is reserved for the devil, his angels, and all who in their folly should follow after him.

So, what we see is that Hades is not a "place," but a state of the soul, i.e. the soul disembodied. Jesus could consistently say that the thief would be with him in paradise, for when Jesus died, he did immediately see paradise. The English phrase that Christ "descended into hell" is a terrible one, for it conjures images of our Lord suffering the flames of eternal torment. This is not the case at all. Jesus died, that is, entered the realm of the dead (Hades), but he was not cast into Gehenna. After three days in Hades, his soul was rejoined with his body and he was resurrected. And all this was done to fulfill the law and the prophets.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
 
Upvote 0
H

HamletsChoice

Guest
Defcon said:
This is weird the more and more I look at it - John 20:17 'Jesus said, "Do not hold on to me, for I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to my brothers and tell them, 'I am returning to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God.' "
Yet Jesus said to the thief that he would be in paradise today....????
I'm confused. I think what I liked about the Calvin link was that it dealt with Christ's spiritual death (which I knew happened, just hadn't read anything in depth about it) but he doesn't address these verses and how they fit. Anyone that can help with this?

I think Scripture teaches us that "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." It seems like when Christ died he was like we will be when we die i.e., "absent from the body and present with His Father," and therefore He was indeed in Paradise that very day. But it wasn't until three days that He "physically and bodily" resurrected. He just had not ascended in a "physical body" yet when His disciples saw Him and that's why He asked His disciples not to touch Him.



I think we will follow the same pattern, although we will not physically resurrect until the last day.



I don't see where Christ descended into hell in the Scriptures and I don't feel comfortable reading that out loud during Church services. But hey, I've been wrong before....so I, like you, am waiting for someone to teach me on this. I hate saying the Apostles Creed is wrong....it was produced by much greater minds and more mature Christians than me.
 
Upvote 0

Defcon

------ Dr. Greg Bahnsen
Sep 14, 2005
1,579
57
✟24,565.00
Faith
Calvinist
Marital Status
Married
Jon_ said:
Now, I will readily admit that hell, heaven, and end times are not my strongest subjects. While I do assent and recognize that their place in the Bible obliges us to learn what God has revealed to us concerning them, I cannot help but feel the matter of investigating the significance of all these things to be markedly less important than others. Therefore, I know as little as the next, and will rely upon the Spirit of God for illumination, and the writings of the godly men come before us for their wise insights.

I think the most important place to start is with a word study of the significant words in focus. These are the Hebrew Sheol, and the Greek Hades, and Gehenna. Let us first examine the New Testament words.

It is very important to understand the distinction between Hades and Gehenna. That this distinction exists in the Bible is no accident, of course. Of the 11 occurances of Hades in the KJV, 10 of them are translated hell, as opposed to the Analytical-Literal Translation, which never translates it as hell. The Literal Translation is divided between the two, having 6 Hades and 5 hell. One instance of Hades being translated hell is when Jesus refers to Is. 14:13, 15 in Luke 10:15. The passage in Isaiah has Sheol. Also in Luke 16:23, where the rich man sees Lazarus in the bosom of Abraham. Here, the rich man is said to be in hell (Hades). In Rev. 20:13, 14, the LITV has death (Gr. thanatos) and hell (Gr. Hades). Thus, it reads "death and hell gave up the dead," where the ALT has "death and the realm of the dead gave up the dead."

Sheol is translated "hell," "grave," or "pit." My understanding is that it is translated Hades in the Septuagint (LXX), which is the term used for the place of the dead or where souls go upon death, as opposed to Gehenna, which is hell, that is, eternal fire. Gehenna comes from the Hebrew phrase meaning "Valley of Hinnom," which is the valley outside the Gate of Hinnom in Jerusalem where all the garbage was dumped. Fires burned there continuously in an effort to dispose of the filth and to keep the smell surpressed. This is what is commonly expressed as being what we consider "hell" (everlasting fire). Intestingly, this "version" of hell is nowhere to be found in the Old Testament. Their understanding of hell was limited to Sheol, which is the underworld, the place of the dead.

In Acts 2:27 and 2:31, the ALT has "realm of the dead" and the LITV has "Hades," which means "realm of the dead." Both of these verses are quotations of Psalm 16:10.
(Psalm 16:10 LITV) For You will not leave My soul in Sheol; You will not give Your Holy One to see corruption.
In the Psalm, David uses Sheol. The LXX translates Hades in this verse. On this passage, John Gill says this.
Meaning, not in the place of the damned, where Christ never went, nor was; for at his death his soul was committed to his Father, and was the same day in paradise: but rather, "sheol" here, as "hades" in the New Testament, signifies the state of the dead, the separate state of souls after death, the invisible world of souls, where Christ's soul was; though it was not left there, nor did it continue, but on the third day returned to its body again. (John Gill, Commentary on the Whole Bible, Ps. 16:10).
Adam Clarke also makes some observations concerning this passage.
As to leaving the soul In hell, it can only mean permitting the life of the Messiah to continue under the power of death; for sheol signifies a pit, a ditch, the grave, or state of the dead. . . . All human beings see corruption, because born in sin, and liable to the curse. The human body of Jesus Christ, as being without sin, saw no corruption. (Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible, Ps. 16:10).
And, we should also consider Keil & Delitzch:
[That] which the apostle in the above passage [1 Th. 5:23] desires for his readers in respect of all three parts of their being, David here expresses as a confident expectation; for [it] implies that he also hopes for his body that which he hopes for his spirit-life centred in the heart, and for his soul raised to dignity both by the work of creation and of grace. He looks death calmly and triumphantly in the face, even his flesh shall dwell or lie securely, viz., without being seized with trembling at its approaching corruption. David's hope rests on this conclusion: it is impossible for the man, who, in appropriating faith and actual experience, calls God his own, to fall into the hands of death. For Ps. 16:10 shows, that what is here thought of in connection with . . . dwelling in safety under the divine protection (Dt. 33:12, 28, cf. Prov. 3:24), is preservation from death. . . . Ps. 16:10 - where to see the grave (Ps. 49:10), equivalent to, to succumb to the state of the grave, i.e., death (Ps. 89:49; Luke 2:26; John 8:51) is the opposite of "seeing life," i.e., experiencing and enjoying it (Ecc. 9:9, John 3:36), the sense of sight being used as the noblest of the senses to denote the sensus communis, i.e., the common sense lying at the basis of all feeling and perception, and figuratively of all active and passive experience (Psychol. S. 234; tr. p. 276) - shows, that what is said here is not intended of an abandonment by which, having once come under the power of death, there is no coming forth again (Böttcher). It is therefore the hope of not dying, that is expressed by David in Ps. 16:10. for by [Holy One] David means himself. [Note: And of course, David prophesied the future fulfillment of this in Christ Jesus as evidenced in Acts 2:27, 31.] (Keil & Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament, Ps. 16:10).
We see a unifying understanding of the passage taking shape, viz. that by hell (Sheol) David meant death or the realm of the dead, i.e. the underworld. With this understanding of the original verse, it behooves us to turn to the New Testament citation and to attempt to understand it in context with its Old Testament basis.
(Acts 2:27, 31 KJV) Because thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
Here, the word translated "hell" is Hades. Before we look into the verse in greater detail, it would be fitting to read A. T. Robertson's comments on the word Hades.
Hades is technically the unseen world, the Hebrew Sheol, the land of the departed, that is death. . . . It is not common in the papyri, but it is common on tombstones in Asia Minor, "doubtless a survival of its use in the old Greek religion" (Moulton and Milligan, Vocabulary). The ancient pagans divided Hades (a privative and idein, to see, abode of the unseen) into Elysium and Tartarus as the Jews put both Abraham’s bosom and Gehenna in Sheol or Hades (cf. Luke 16:25). Christ was in Hades (Acts 2:27, Acts 2:31), not in Gehenna. We have here the figure of two buildings, the Church of Christ on the Rock, the House of Death (Hades). "In the Old Testament the ‘gates of Hades’ (Sheol) never bears any other meaning (Is. 38:10; Wisd. 16:3; 3 Maccabees 5:51) than death," McNeile claims. See also Ps. 9:13; Ps. 107:18; Job. 38:17. . . . (Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament, Matt. 16:18).
From this premise, his comments on Acts 2:27 become more clear.
Hades is the unseen world, Hebrew Sheol, but here it is viewed as death itself "considered as a rapacious destroyer" (Hackett). It does not mean the place of punishment, though both heaven and the place of torment are in Hades (Luke 16:23). "Death and Hades are strictly parallel terms: he who is dead is in Hades" (Page). The use of eis here = en is common enough. The Textus Receptus here reads eis Haidou (genitive case) like the Attic idiom with domon (abode) understood. "Hades" in English is not translation, but transliteration. The phrase in the Apostles’ Creed, "descended into hell" is from this passage in Acts (Hades, not Gehenna). The English word "hell" is Anglo-Saxon from helan, to hide, and was used in the Authorized Version to translate both Hades as here and Gehenna as in Matt. 5:22. (ibid. Acts 2:27).
Albert Barnes entreats this same verse masterfully, and I would quote him at length were he not so lengthy. Instead, I will give his two footnotes concerning common misunderstandings drawn from this verse.
That nothing is affirmed here about the destination of the human soul of Christ after his death. That he went to the region of the dead is implied, but nothing further. It may be remarked that the Scriptures affirm nothing about the state of his soul in that time which intervened between his death and resurrection. The only intimation which occurs on the subject is such as to leave us to suppose that he was in a state of happiness. To the dying thief he said, "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise." When Jesus died, he said, "It is finished"; and he doubtless meant by that that his sufferings and toils for man’s redemption were at an end. All suppositions of any toils or pains after his death are fables, and without the slightest warrant in the New Testament. (Albert Barnes' Notes on the New Testament, Acts 2:27).
The full text of his comments can be viewed here: http://www.studylight.org/com/bnn/view.cgi?book=ac&chapter=002.

Thus, the resolution of this matter is that Christ did indeed die, which is inferred from his descending to Hades, where the souls of the dead go. Of course, Christ really did have to die for our sins, for this is the threat made to Adam by God and he must be true to his word. Only Christ's true death would suffice as propiation, and Jesus's descent into Hades was proof of that. Hades does not refer to Gehenna, that is, hell, which is the place of eternal torment. That place is reserved for the devil, his angels, and all who in their folly should follow after him.

So, what we see is that Hades is not a "place," but a state of the soul, i.e. the soul disembodied. Jesus could consistently say that the thief would be with him in paradise, for when Jesus died, he did immediately see paradise. The English phrase that Christ "descended into hell" is a terrible one, for it conjures images of our Lord suffering the flames of eternal torment. This is not the case at all. Jesus died, that is, entered the realm of the dead (Hades), but he was not cast into Gehenna. After three days in Hades, his soul was rejoined with his body and he was resurrected. And all this was done to fulfill the law and the prophets.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
Thanks so much for this - definitely the most clear, concise explanation I have read. I have a much better understanding of where all the confusion comes in. Thanks again!!!! :thumbsup: :) :clap:
 
Upvote 0

Jon_

Senior Veteran
Jan 30, 2005
2,998
91
43
California
✟26,116.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
pjw said:
Jon_, you're incredibly theologically intelligent for your age, God has blessed you with a great mind and a magnificent intellect.
I appreciate the encouragement, but the large majority of my post is borrowed capital from some of the most brilliant men that God has raised up to instruct his children—John Gill, Albert Barnes, A. T. Robertson, etc. I am truly thankful for these men, their wise insights into God's word, and their faithful exegesis thereof. Would that I should even be able to address a single book rightly, much less the entire Bible. If I exhibited any talent it was merely this, that I was able to arrange the words of these men in such a way as to appear to have done something novel.

But above and beyond all, it is God who receives the glory. For without the light of Christ and the illumination of the Holy Spirit, all our minds would be dark and our speculations futile. I thank God that he is not willing his children should be ignorant of him, but that he faithfully reveals his truth to us in his own time, according to sovereign plan.

Soli Deo Gloria

Jon
 
Upvote 0

SoaringEagle

Regular Member
Jul 12, 2005
148
5
✟303.00
Faith
Christian
There are some outside of faith in Christ that point to these two verses as a contradictionthe bible "appears" to have.

Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?
(a) Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43).
(b) No. He said to Mary Magdalene two days later, "I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John 20:17).


Well, Luke doesn't necessarily say what we think it does. I don't think the first (a) should be held as "YES". Here is why.

LUKE 23:39-43 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeed justly: for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

At first glance, it is obvious why most people have come to the conclusion that Jesus went to Abraham's Bosom. We know Jesus died that very day and it seems as though Jesus promised to meet this thief in the place called paradise. We know from other passages that Jesus went to hades, therefore one could conclude (without looking deeper) that Christ went to Abraham's Bosom, because this is where the Old Testament saints were comforted. This would have to be paradise; no other place in hades would qualify.

There are at least 2 reasons for sure that this interpretation should be questioned and "tested" with other Scriptures.

One reason is the sentence structure and punctuation of verse 43. The entire meaning of Jesus' words is determined by where the translators saw fit to put the comma, as there was none in the original Greek. As we can see, most translations put the comma before the word "Today" but if they were to put it after, we would have a completely different statement from our Lord: "Verily I say unto thee today, you shall be with me in paradise." As you can see it is extremely important to know where to place the punctuation. Bullinger's Critical Lexicon has helpful evidence to prove that the comma is in the wrong place in most of our versions:

" 'Semeron' (the Greek word for 'today') when it comes after a verb, belongs to that verb, unless it is separated from it and thrown into the next clause by the presence of 'oti' (the Greek word for 'that')." {14}

In other words, when there are two verbs in a sentence and the word "semeron" (today) is found between the verbs, the presence of "oti" determines that the word "semeron" belongs to the second verb; therefore, when it is translated, we should put the comma before "semeron." If "oti" is not present, then we should put the comma after "semeron." Here are some examples of verses without the presence of "oti," which means that "semeron" (today) belongs to the verb that it follows:

Matthew 21:28 ...Son, go work today in my vineyard.

Luke 22:34 ...the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

Matthew 16:3 ...It will be foul weather today: for the sky is red and lowering....

Here are some examples of sentences with "oti" in them:

Luke 19:9 And Jesus said unto him, (oti) This day is salvation come...

Luke 4:21 And he began to say unto them, (oti) this day is this scripture fulfilled...

Mark 14:30 ... Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse] crows twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.

In our verse, Luke 23:43, we have the first situation, for the word "oti" is not used. So the comma should follow the word "today" because it belongs to the first verb "say" rather than the second, "be with." The Emphasized Bible, translated by J.B. Rotherham, who specializes in punctuation and word emphasis, gives us this translation:

ROTHERHAM And he said unto him -- Verily I say unto thee this day: with me shalt thou be in Paradise.

When we place the comma after "today," we see that Jesus was not telling the thief that He was going to see him that day, but rather Jesus was emphasizing His statement. One might ask, "Why would Jesus say, 'I tell you today'? It seems that He would be wasting His words." This is a good question. It would be useless to apply this lengthy argument if the translation didn't make sense in its context. We need to examine the question put to our Lord. The thief said, "Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom." Notice that he was looking for a future promise: "When you get there don't forget me." He was a thief who deserved to be punished; he admitted this himself. Therefore, Jesus gave to him a promise that he could immediately put faith in, rather than giving him something for future hope. Pastor Leon Stump paraphrases the verse this way:

"I'll do more than remember you at some future time; I give you my word this very day that you will be with me in my kingdom." {15}

The 2nd reason why we can question the Abraham's Bosom interpretation is found in the word "paradise." The basic meaning of this word "paradise" is "a park" [Strong's]. Again we have a situation where we must determine what is meant by the word from the different biblical contexts where it is used. "Paradise" is used three times in the entire Bible: here in Luke, and in the following two passages:

II CORINTHIANS 12:2,4 I knew a man in Christ ...such an one caught up to the third heaven. ...How that he was caught up into paradise, and heard unspeakable words, which it is not lawful for a man to utter.

REVELATION 2:7 He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God.

As we can see, neither of these passages can refer to Abraham's Bosom, for that place was in the underworld, or at least someplace close enough to hell that they could communicate back and forth [see Luke 16]. The place this man in Christ was caught up to was in the third heaven, and it is extremely doubtful that the tree of life was in Abraham's Bosom. This tree is something that Christian overcomers can partake of and certainly their destination is heaven.

We see that paradise is referred to as a place in heaven 2 out of 3 times it is used. Yet, because of the punctuation problems in Luke 23:43, we have referred to it as Abraham's Bosom. (It is interesting to note that Luke 16 is the only reference that calls the place of the dead Abraham's Bosom.)

We have one more indication that Jesus was not referring to Abraham's Bosom. This is found again in the thief's question "Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom." The thief was asking Jesus about His kingdom. One could hardly think of the different compartments in the underworld as part of the kingdom of God. As a matter of fact, we find the phrases "kingdom of God" and "kingdom of heaven" used synonymously in the different Gospels. It doesn't make sense that Jesus would address the thief about Abraham's Bosom, when he was asking Him about His coming kingdom. We can only conclude that Jesus was promising the thief that He would see him in heaven at some future date.

It is unfortunate that the translation of this verse has been so misleading. Through careful study we have seen that this verse does not provide the foundation for the doctrines that have come out it. Yet many still refuse to investigate with an open mind all the other evidence of Jesus'Spiritual death.

ALSO

LUKE 23:46 And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.

It is important that we don't make the passage say more than what is intended. There is no mention of heaven and Jesus is obviously in a desperate state. Notice that He shouted with a loud voice. It is also important to understand everything that took place prior to this cry.

We find help as we examine the other Gospel accounts of this scenario. As we compare this passage to the others, we find that Luke is the only book that doesn't include "My God, why hast thou forsaken me?" Yet in the other passages, this is the statement that comes just before Jesus "cried again with a loud voice and yielded up his spirit" [Matt.27:50]. It is clear that this loud cry was His supplication in Luke (quoted above). Therefore it is seen as a cry of desperation rather than a prayer. John's Gospel records something entirely different for the Master's last words: "It is finished: and he bowed his head, and gave up his spirit" [John 19:30]. Many have interpreted this statement as meaning redemption was finished; others say Christ was declaring the Old Covenant was finished. But when we compare it with the other Gospels, we see it is located in the same place as "Jesus cried with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit" and "into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said thus he gave up the ghost." This is an occurrence of different wording in the different Gospels for the same statement. It is not uncommon for different Gospel writers to say the same thing, but with different words. It is not necessarily the exact words used by Jesus that are important, but rather the meaning behind the words. It is my opinion that Jesus was saying, "My life is finished, I yield up my spirit."

One thing is for sure, the passage is not clear as to exactly what is being said, therefore, we should be careful what conclusions we arrive at. It is important that we are not dogmatic with unclear passages.

As far as Jesus going directly to heaven after He died, we have definite evidence that this could not be so. Jesus was very clear when He spoke to Mary immediately after He returned into His body:

JOHN 20:17 Jesus saith to her, Touch Me not; for I have not yet ascended unto the Father: but go unto my brethren, and say to them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and my God and your God.

Jesus had yet to ascend into heaven! Plain and simple.

EPHESIANS 4:9-10 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.)

The lower parts of the earth is a direct reference to sheol [Ps.63:9; Is.44:23]. It is clear that Jesus went to hell before He went to heaven!

Though this makes since to me, and I believe it is the accurate interpretation to clear up any confusion with these verses, please remember to "test all things".

SoaringEagle
 
Upvote 0
H

HamletsChoice

Guest
SoaringEagle said:
There are some outside of faith in Christ that point to these two verses as a contradictionthe bible "appears" to have.

Did Jesus ascend to Paradise the same day of the crucifixion?
(a) Yes. He said to the thief who defended him, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43).
(b) No. He said to Mary Magdalene two days later, "I have not yet ascended to the Father" (John 20:17).


SoaringEagle

I think Scripture teaches us that "to be absent from the body is to be present with the Lord." It seems like when Christ died he was like we will be when we die i.e., "absent from the body and present with His Father," and therefore He was indeed in Paradise that very day. But it wasn't until three days that He "physically and bodily" resurrected. He just had not ascended in a "physical body" yet when His disciples saw Him and that's why He asked His disciples not to touch Him.
 
Upvote 0