A Weekend in Hell

[GodsGrace]

This is of course all true about Abraham, and when people erroneously claim that our theological term "Faith" means nothing more than what a modern dictionary says, this is a useful story to help illustrate just how wrong that is.

What about Isaac? He barely gets a mention in passing. Consider the Faith of Isaac!! I don't care what age he was, he could've taken his old man out. Yet he never raised a hand against his father. Not when the knife was drawn, not even when the knife was raised?!? What a giant of Faith!
Without his critical contribution of demonstrating his Faith by his inaction, the story we have would read rather differently, such that we'd likely not have this family's story at all.

I think there's a valid parallel between Isaac and that Sabbath that Jesus spent in the tomb; the only 24 hour day He spent in the tomb.

What I find really amazing about Isaac is he didn't even need to have his name changed to do this, whereas both his father and son DID need God to intervene and change their nature as well as their names for them to be able to walk out their Faith. And no those two did not do more than Isaac, because greater love has no man than this, that he should lay down his life for his friends.

What a great point!
This shows how everything would be if Christianity worked the way Jesus meant it to.

The Christian man should be the head of the household.
But he would have to know how to be the head, some want to be but don't know how.

Then he would love his wife as Jesus loves His Church (bride) and his wife would love him as the Church loves Jesus.

The children would then love and respect and honor and trust their parents.

And all would be good with the world, but ole' split hooves got involved in everything.

 

[Razeontherock]

Hi R
I personally have no explanation for 1 Peter 3:20 and I don't care to use commentaries; I like to rely on what I've been taught.

I do know that Jesus did not preach to those in 1 Peter 3:20 but He only proclaimed, or stated to them, that the salvation process is now complete.

Most believe that Jesus could not have entered hell. So 1 Peter must be referring to Luke 16, hades. He went there to release those in Abraham's bossom so that they could now enter heaven, and He proclaimed to those in the flame that all was now complete.

It seems to me that those "in the flames" were already in hell, but perhaps Jesus made His proclamation from Abraham's Bossom. It does appear that they could hear each other by verse 24.

As to the church, I'm not sure which church you're referring to, but I can't answer except to say that we do have continuing revelation. There is so much more history known today that we may better be able to understand the written word.

Also, the bible does say a few ideas that are difficult to understand.

Ok, thank you for this.

You make a distinction between preaching, and proclaiming that the Salvation process is now complete. I find no substantial difference. Same with different aspects and words used for hell. I see here some people get all particular about that, only to later say they all combine anyway.

Many passages are not explained by the sanitized modern version of Jesus' descent, and this is not something that modern findings of history improve upon. This is purely a Faith position, so I think the original Apostles that physically saw our risen Savior are in the best position to know. Obviously this is not Salvific; thank God our own understanding is not what our eternal destiny depends on!

 

[GodsGrace]

There are a few verses that seem to confirm that Jesus did actually go to Heĺl or Hedes, Sheol or whatever you want to call it-

Therefore my heart rejoiced, and my tongue was glad; Moreover my flesh also will rest in hope. For You will not leave my soul in Hades, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption. You have made known to me the ways of life; You will make me full of joy in Your presence.’ “Men and brethren, let me speak freely to you of the patriarch David, that he is both dead and buried, and his tomb is with us to this day. Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. Acts 2:26‭-‬31 NKJV

But to each one of us grace was given according to the measure of Christ’s gift. Therefore He says: “When He ascended on high, He led captivity captive, And gave gifts to men.” (Now this, “He ascended”—what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.) Ephesians 4:7‭-‬10 NKJV

I am He who lives, and was dead, and behold, I am alive forevermore. Amen. And I have the keys of Hades and of Death. Revelation 1:18 NKJV

I'm pretty sure that Jesus wasn't spared the full punishment that was due to us but He took it on in our pĺace and so conquered both death and Helĺ.

Hi Andy,
Hades is not hell. Hell is a final destination. Hades was a waiting place where those that were judged righteous were waiting for Jesus' resurrection so they could finally go to heaven. It's an accepted belief that Jesus tore the curtain to heaven open upon His death.
Luke 23:45 The veil of the temple was torn in two --- opening the way to the Holy of Holies for everyone and not just for the High Priest.

Acts 2:26-31 says that Jesus soul will not be left in Hades, but He certainly made a trip there, He said so Himself in Luke 16:19-31.
This would be the "lower parts of the earth". It was believed that Hades was in the lower parts of the earth, really we can't know where it is. Do we really know where heaven is?

Also, yes, Jesus flesh did not see corruption.
Have I missed your point?

Jesus certainly did conquer death since we can now truly be alive after death and go directly to be with God.

 

[GodsGrace]

Ok, thank you for this.

You make a distinction between preaching, and proclaiming that the Salvation process is now complete. I find no substantial difference. Same with different aspects and words used for hell. I see here some people get all particular about that, only to later say they all combine anyway.

Many passages are not explained by the sanitized modern version of Jesus' descent, and this is not something that modern findings of history improve upon. This is purely a Faith position, so I think the original Apostles that physically saw our risen Savior are in the best position to know. Obviously this is not Salvific; thank God our own understanding is not what our eternal destiny depends on!

I believe preaching is done to help bring someone to salvation.
Proclaiming is just Jesus saying that the salvation process is complete. Since he was saying this to the disobedient, I don't believe He was saying it to bring anyone to salvation since those not obedient were already in the place of torment and it was too late for them.
Hebrews 9:27 It's appointed for men to die once, and then the judgement.

When Jesus was on the cross and said "It is finished", He was not preaching...He was proclaiming.

Although the word hell was translated incorrectly when the N.T. was written, it is still true that each word in the Hebrew had a different meaning.
Sheoul
Hades
Gehenna

These were all taken and translated hell. This was not right.
The only place the N.T. really speaks of hell is in 2 Peter 2:4, the English word here is Tartarus. It is actually important to know the difference between the different words.

I agree with your last paragraph. I also trust the early church fathers and look to see what they said on different subjects. You cannot, however, deny that revelation is ongoing. Especially in the CAtholic church. Confession has changed drastically, the idea of purgatory has changed, and it's now accepted that Jesus could not have gone to hell.

 

[Razeontherock]

I believe preaching is done to help bring someone to salvation.
Proclaiming is just Jesus saying that the salvation process is complete. Since he was saying this to the disobedient, I don't believe He was saying it to bring anyone to salvation since those not obedient were already in the place of torment and it was too late for them.
Hebrews 9:27 It's appointed for men to die once, and then the judgement.

When Jesus was on the cross and said "It is finished", He was not preaching...He was proclaiming.

Although the word hell was translated incorrectly when the N.T. was written, it is still true that each word in the Hebrew had a different meaning.
Sheoul
Hades
Gehenna

These were all taken and translated hell. This was not right.
The only place the N.T. really speaks of hell is in 2 Peter 2:4, the English word here is Tartarus. It is actually important to know the difference between the different words.

I agree with your last paragraph. I also trust the early church fathers and look to see what they said on different subjects. You cannot, however, deny that revelation is ongoing. Especially in the CAtholic church. Confession has changed drastically, the idea of purgatory has changed, and it's now accepted that Jesus could not have gone to hell.

I still see lots of problems with this. What do we do with Rev 1:15? Jesus' feet being brass, as though they burned in a furnace; how did they get like that if He did not walk through the fires of hell preaching (condemning) the disobedient spirits there?

Those not into symbolism and with no gift of interpreting dreams or visions may not care, but this symbolism is hugely important and repeated to us no less than 4 times.

The most important thing here is that He literally became sin for us per 2 Cor 5:21 taking the curse of the law away from us. As long as that point of Faith is still intact the rest of this remains minor ...

 

[Andyintheuk]

Hi R
I personally have no explanation for 1 Peter 3:20 and I don't care to use commentaries; I like to rely on what I've been taught.

I do know that Jesus did not preach to those in 1 Peter 3:20 but He only proclaimed, or stated to them, that the salvation process is now complete.

Most believe that Jesus could not have entered hell. So 1 Peter must be referring to Luke 16, hades. He went there to release those in Abraham's bossom so that they could now enter heaven, and He proclaimed to those in the flame that all was now complete.

It seems to me that those "in the flames" were already in hell, but perhaps Jesus made His proclamation from Abraham's Bossom. It does appear that they could hear each other by verse 24.

As to the church, I'm not sure which church you're referring to, but I can't answer except to say that we do have continuing revelation. There is so much more history known today that we may better be able to understand the written word.

Also, the bible does say a few ideas that are difficult to understand.

Hi Wondering. I think that one thing this thread has done for me is to make me really contemplate on the contrasts of the two alternatives of Heaven and Hell.

I had a good trawl through the Old Testament and could find very little on the subject of where OT believers went. Jacob mentioned it in times of great anguish to illustrate his feelings at the loss of children-
“And all his sons and all his daughters arose to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted, and he said, “For I shall go down into the grave to my son in mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭37:35‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“But he said, “My son shall not go down with you, for his brother is dead, and he is left alone. If any calamity should befall him along the way in which you go, then you would bring down my gray hair with sorrow to the grave.”” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭42:38‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Again Job in a time of anguish-
“If I wait for the grave as my house, If I make my bed in the darkness, If I say to corruption, ‘You are my father,’ And to the worm, ‘You are my mother and my sister,’ Where then is my hope? As for my hope, who can see it? Will they go down to the gates of Sheol? Shall we have rest together in the dust?”” ‭‭Job‬ ‭17:13-16‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

The Psalms - “For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.” ‭Psalms‬ ‭16:10‬ ‭NKJV‬‬ This was prophesying the verse 1 Peter 3:19. There are very few prophecies in the Old Testament of the resurrection, this is one.

More convincing to me is the account of Elisha in a heavenly chariot.

Luke 16 v 19-30 is a parable to illustrate the choices we have, whether we follow God or money. Parables are allegories, stories to illustrate a point. Sometimes we can read more into these parables than there actually is, for example in the previous chapter, the story of the prodigal son. -
““And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that I have is yours.” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭15:31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬. We can’t read into that that the Prodigal had squandered everything and came back to no inheritance.

We can read into the story of the rich man and Lazarus, the sharp contrast between Heaven and Hell, that there is no transfer between the two and that our loved ones need to believe and repent in order to avoid Hell. I am not sure that Jesus in one short parable, constrained by the limitations of the English language, can adequately describe the glory and majesty of Heaven or the horrific torment of Hell, which is probably why the Bible doesn’t attempt to. This parable is rich in illustrative description to emphasise His points.

Unusually, Lazarus was named in this parable. Could that be to dissuade us from concluding that all destitute people go to Heaven and all filthy rich go to Hell? Jesus made this parable personal about two individuals. I still feel that this is a parable rather than a report or a case study.

Well anyway the issue of Hell, Sheol or Hedes is a matter ripe for harmless speculation based on a few snippets tucked away in the Bible. Anyone that can give a definitive answer is blagging!

Back to your point about Jesus in Hell, I feel drawn to the view that He did go there to fulfil Psalm 16:10. The verse is quite specific about Him going to Hell and how He passed His time there, preaching to the disobedient. What did He preach? Maybe a few useful tips on how to survive in torment, maybe a warning: 'If you think this is bad, wait ‘til you get to the lake of fire!'

 

[GodsGrace]

Hi Wondering. I think that one thing this thread has done for me is to make me really contemplate on the contrasts of the two alternatives of Heaven and Hell.

I had a good trawl through the Old Testament and could find very little on the subject of where OT believers went. Jacob mentioned it in times of great anguish to illustrate his feelings at the loss of children-
“And all his sons and all his daughters arose to comfort him; but he refused to be comforted, and he said, “For I shall go down into the grave to my son in mourning.” Thus his father wept for him.” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭37:35‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

“But he said, “My son shall not go down with you, for his brother is dead, and he is left alone. If any calamity should befall him along the way in which you go, then you would bring down my gray hair with sorrow to the grave.”” ‭‭Genesis‬ ‭42:38‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

Again Job in a time of anguish-
“If I wait for the grave as my house, If I make my bed in the darkness, If I say to corruption, ‘You are my father,’ And to the worm, ‘You are my mother and my sister,’ Where then is my hope? As for my hope, who can see it? Will they go down to the gates of Sheol? Shall we have rest together in the dust?”” ‭‭Job‬ ‭17:13-16‬ ‭NKJV‬‬

The Psalms - “For You will not leave my soul in Sheol, Nor will You allow Your Holy One to see corruption.” ‭Psalms‬ ‭16:10‬ ‭NKJV‬‬ This was prophesying the verse 1 Peter 3:19. There are very few prophecies in the Old Testament of the resurrection, this is one.

More convincing to me is the account of Elisha in a heavenly chariot.

Luke 16 v 19-30 is a parable to illustrate the choices we have, whether we follow God or money. Parables are allegories, stories to illustrate a point. Sometimes we can read more into these parables than there actually is, for example in the previous chapter, the story of the prodigal son. -
““And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that I have is yours.” ‭‭Luke‬ ‭15:31‬ ‭NKJV‬‬. We can’t read into that that the Prodigal had squandered everything and came back to no inheritance.

We can read into the story of the rich man and Lazarus, the sharp contrast between Heaven and Hell, that there is no transfer between the two and that our loved ones need to believe and repent in order to avoid Hell. I am not sure that Jesus in one short parable, constrained by the limitations of the English language, can adequately describe the glory and majesty of Heaven or the horrific torment of Hell, which is probably why the Bible doesn’t attempt to. This parable is rich in illustrative description to emphasise His points.

Unusually, Lazarus was named in this parable. Could that be to dissuade us from concluding that all destitute people go to Heaven and all filthy rich go to Hell? Jesus made this parable personal about two individuals. I still feel that this is a parable rather than a report or a case study.

Well anyway the issue of Hell, Sheol or Hedes is a matter ripe for harmless speculation based on a few snippets tucked away in the Bible. Anyone that can give a definitive answer is blagging!

Back to your point about Jesus in Hell, I feel drawn to the view that He did go there to fulfil Psalm 16:10. The verse is quite specific about Him going to Hell and how He passed His time there, preaching to the disobedient. What did He preach? Maybe a few useful tips on how to survive in torment, maybe a warning: 'If you think this is bad, wait ‘til you get to the lake of fire!'

There's very little in the O.T. about life after death because this revelation was not given and there were different ideas about the after death life. Those in the Sanhedrin, for instance, did not even believe in an afterlife.

The books of the Macabee brothers, which were removed from the Protestant bible, did speak about the dead as if they could hear and see us and it did say we could speak to the dead.

I tend to trust, instead, what Jesus said about the afterlife. The most we can know about it is in Luke 16, as you stated. However, I can say that most theologians believe this is not an analogy or a parable because Jesus specifically names a name and mentions different persons as if they were real.

I would definintely stay with the N.T. when trying to understand what comes after this life. The Wedding Banquet in Mathew 22 is another indication and also the Transfiguration in Mathew 17 shows that we are alive after death and that we can recognize each other.

Psalm 16:10 is just telling us that Jesus' body will not be left in sheol, the place of the dead, or will He be allowed to decay. In fact, Jesus' body is nowhere to be found! Sheol is not hell and I don't understand how you take Psalm 16:10 to mean that Jesus descended into hell.

As to Luke 15:31, YES, we can know that the younger son came back to no inheritance. He already had taken his inheritance when he asked for it originally before leaving the father's home. The father gave him his share of the inheritance and the prodigal son will receive no more. All the balance of the inheritance will now go to the older son, the one that remained faithful to the Father and stayed home with him.

I agree that our wondering what hell or heaven are like is just all speculation. Paul was taken to heaven and he had no words to describe it. 2 Corinthians 12.

What we can be sure of is that Jesus spoke of both so both exist and I prefer to be in heaven!

 

[Razeontherock]

Right. It is to be an encouragement, and a way of building one another up by discussing these things. It's not supposed to be something to quarrel about, especially since none of us really know.

While it may be natural to be anxious about it, Scripture teaches not to be anxious; that alone requires the Holy Spirit!