Matthew 28:1 - 10
After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to look at the tomb.
2 There was a violent earthquake, for an angel of the Lord came down from heaven and, going to the tomb, rolled back the stone and sat on it.3 His appearance was like lightning, and his clothes were white as snow.4 The guards were so afraid of him that they shook and became like dead men.
5 The angel said to the women, “Do not be afraid, for I know that you are looking for Jesus, who was crucified. 6 He is not here; he has risen, just as he said. Come and see the place where he lay. 7 Then go quickly and tell his disciples: ‘He has risen from the dead and is going ahead of you into Galilee. There you will see him.’ Now I have told you.”
8 So the women hurried away from the tomb, afraid yet filled with joy, and ran to tell his disciples. 9 Suddenly Jesus met them. “Greetings,” he said. They came to him, clasped his feet and worshiped him. 10 Then Jesus said to them, “Do not be afraid. Go and tell my brothers to go to Galilee; there they will see me.”
Question:
ReplyDeleteWhy is there such a difference between accounts in the Gospels?
https://www.workingpreacher.org/preaching.aspx?commentary_id=56 says:
ReplyDeleteThe resurrection accounts in the four gospels have similarities and differences. They are similar in that in each case the event is on a Sunday morning (two days after the crucifixion), Mary Magdalene is present at the tomb, and the tomb was found to be empty.
But there are differences. (1) In the Synoptic Gospels the women arrive at the tomb early in the morning, either at dawn or after the sun had risen. In the Gospel of John it is still dark. (2) There is a difference in the number and names of women present (except that Mary Magdalene is present in all four accounts). In Matthew's account there are only two women (Mary Magdalene and the other Mary); Mark names three; Luke names three and adds that others had accompanied them to the tomb as well; John has Mary Magdalene alone. (3) Finally, there is a difference concerning the placement of the stone at the doorway of the tomb. In three of the gospels the stone had been rolled away prior to the approach of the women. Matthew's account is the exception. There an earthquake takes place, and an angel descends from heaven and rolls the stone away after the women arrive. Clearly, it is impossible to harmonize the details to everyone's satisfaction.
Various proposals have been made to account for the differences. Perhaps the most satisfying one is that each of the four evangelists had a tradition from early times that had developed in different geographical and church contexts. In other words, while Matthew and Luke depended on the Gospel of Mark for the writing of their gospels in general, when they arrived at the Easter narrative they used the stories that they had known from their respective communities. They laid the Gospel of Mark to the side and used their own versions. To be sure, one can notice some identical wording between Matthew 28:5-8 and Mark 16:6-8, and there it is likely that Matthew took some material from Mark (including the speech of the angel and the flight of the women from the tomb), but otherwise Matthew used his own material.
Matthew's account is the most dramatic of the four resurrection narratives. Mary Magdalene goes to the tomb; no reason is given. The earthquake takes place, and the angel rolls back the stone. As a story, the stage is now set for a marvelous event. We might expect Jesus to rise and come out of the tomb (as Lazarus does in John 11:41-44). Yet that does not happen. The resurrection has taken place already, while the tomb was sealed. The tomb is empty (28:6). In this gospel, as in the others, we do not actually have a "resurrection account" in the strict sense, but a "post-resurrection account." The transformation of the physical to spiritual body has taken place (cf. 1 Corinthians 15:42-57), an act of God that took place apart from human view.
At 28:8-10 the risen Jesus appears to the two women as they are on their way to tell the disciples. This is actually a strange turn of events. The angel has just commissioned them (28:7), and now Jesus blocks their path. They recognize and worship him. The reason that they take hold of his feet might simply be a gesture to assure them that he is not a detached spirit, but the actual Jesus. These women are the first witnesses to his resurrection.
http://www.compellingtruth.org/resurrection-accounts.html says:
ReplyDeleteHow many women were at Christ's tomb on that first Easter morning – 1, 2, 3, or 5? Were there two angels or only one that announced His resurrection? Did Jesus appear to His followers at Galilee or Jerusalem?
Do the accounts contradict each other? Or are the resurrection accounts found in the gospels historically accurate?
The gospels most certainly agree on the major facts (e.g. Christ's burial, God raising Jesus from the dead). However, there are various apparent minor discrepancies in details like those listed below:
Number of women at the tomb:
- Matthew – 2
- Mark – 3
- Luke – 5
- John – 1
Time of visit to the tomb:
- Matthew – Dawn
- Mark – Sun had risen
- Luke – Dawn
- John – Still dark
Messengers at the tomb:
- Matthew – One angel
- Mark – Men
- Luke – Men
- John – Two angels
Location of the messengers relative to the tomb:
- Matthew – Outside then inside
- Mark – Inside
- Luke – Inside
- John – Inside
Woman/women's encounter with Jesus:
- Matthew – Held Christ
- Mark – Nothing
- Luke – Nothing
- John – Told not to touch Christ
Whom the woman/women told:
- Matthew – Disciples
- Mark – No one
- Luke – Disciples and others
- John – Only Mary Magdalene told the disciples
Location of the appearance to the disciples:
- Matthew – Galilee
- Mark – Jerusalem
- Luke – Jerusalem
- John – Jerusalem
http://www.compellingtruth.org/resurrection-accounts.html continued:
ReplyDeleteBefore we address the specifics of the resurrection accounts, it is good to first understand a few basics of Biblical interpretation that will aid our understanding of why some things differ in the gospels. First, it's important to remember that a partial report is not a false report. Just because each gospel author doesn't report every detail of a story doesn't mean it's inaccurate. All historians edit their accounts for various purposes and the gospel writers are no different.
Second, a divergent account is not a false account. For example, Matthew speaks of one angel at Christ's tomb whereas John mentions two. A contradiction? Not at all. Simple math says if you have two, you also have one. Matthew did not say there was only one angel; if he had then we would have a true contradiction. Instead, he just records the words of the one who spoke. Though divergent accounts can seem to cast doubt on the accuracy of the reporters, we must try and reserve judgment until all the facts are in.
These two rules should be kept in mind when examining the multiple resurrection accounts.
The below represents a humble attempt to succinctly lay out a reconciliation and timeline of the gospel account records of Christ's resurrection and his appearing over the following forty days to various individuals.
1. An angel rolls away the stone from the tomb before sunrise (Matthew 28:2-4). The guards are seized with fear and eventually flee.
2. Women disciples visit the tomb and discover Christ missing (Matthew 28:1; Mark 16:1-4; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1).
3. Mary Magdalene leaves to tell Peter and John (John 20:1-2).
4. Other women remain at the tomb; they see two angels who tell them of Christ's resurrection (Matthew 28:5-7; Mark 16:5-7; Luke 24:4-8).
5. Peter and John run to the tomb and then leave (Luke 24:12; John 20:3-10).
6. Christ's First Appearance: Mary Magdalene returns to the tomb; Christ appears to her (Mark 16:9-11; John 20:11-18).
7. Christ's Second Appearance: Jesus appears to the other women (Mary, mother of James, Salome, and Joanna) (Matthew 28:8-10).
8. At this time, the guards report the events to the religious leaders and are bribed to lie (Matthew 28:11-15).
9. Christ's Third Appearance: Jesus privately appears to Peter (1 Corinthians 15:5).
10. Christ's Fourth Appearance: Jesus appears to Cleopas and companion (Mark 16:12-13; Luke 24:13-32).
11. Christ's Fifth Appearance: Jesus appears to 10 apostles, with Thomas missing, in the Upper Room (Luke 24:36-43).
12. Christ's Sixth Appearance: Eight days after His appearance to the 10 apostles, Jesus appears to all 11 apostles, including Thomas (John 20:26-28).
13. Christ's Seventh Appearance: Jesus appears to 7 disciples by the Sea of Galilee and performs the miracle of the fish (John 21:1-14).
14. Christ's Eighth Appearance: Jesus appears to 500 on a mountain in Galilee (Matthew 28:16-20; Mark 16:15-18; 1 Corinthians 15:6).
15. Christ's Ninth Appearance: Jesus appears to His half-brother James (1 Corinthians 15:7).
16. Christ's Tenth Appearance: In Jerusalem, Jesus appears again to His disciples (Acts 1:3-8).
17. Christ's Eleventh Appearance: Jesus ascends into Heaven while the disciples look on (Mark 16:19-20; Luke 24:50-53; Acts 1:9-12).
My 2 cents:
ReplyDeleteIt seems kind of a shame that given the greatest single event in the universe, all I can think of to ask is "Why are the gospel account different?"
At first reading, it all seems pretty straight forward - and I couldn't think of any more questions.
But, like usual, I missed probably one of the most fundamental questions that we should know the answer to - and don't.
What happened to Jesus during the "3" days he was dead? How does this fit into Him paying the penalty for our sins? How does that work?
More on this coming up . . .
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/he-descended-into-hell addresses where Jesus went:
ReplyDeleteBut what happened after he died? We know that his body was laid in Joseph’s tomb, but what about his human soul?
God made human beings to be embodied souls and ensouled bodies, and death rips this union asunder. But what happens to these two parts after they’re separated? Psalm 16:10 gives us a window into the biblical teaching.
You will not abandon my soul to Sheol,
or let your holy one see corruption.
This passage directs us to the normal account of what happened when a human being died prior to the death and resurrection of Jesus. The soul was abandoned “to Sheol,” and the body saw corruption or decayed.
In Acts 2:29–31, Peter tells us that David, in writing this psalm, foresaw the resurrection of Christ, “that he was not abandoned to Sheol (that is, his soul wasn’t), nor did his flesh see corruption” (notice that Peter reads the second line as a reference to Jesus’s body or flesh). Thus prior to Jesus, at death, souls normally went to Sheol, and bodies (flesh) decayed.
In the Old Testament, Sheol is the place of the souls of the dead, both the righteous (like Jacob, Genesis 37:35, and Samuel, 1 Samuel 28:13–14) and the wicked (Psalm 31:17). In the New Testament, the Hebrew word Sheol is translated as hades, and the description of Sheol in the Old and New Testaments bears some resemblance to the Hades of Greek mythology. It is under the earth (Numbers 16:30–33), and it is like a city with gates (Isaiah 38:10) and bars (Job 17:16). It is a land of darkness, a place where shades, the shadowy souls of men, dwell (Isaiah 14:9; 26:14). It is the land of forgetfulness (Psalm 88:12), where no work is done and no wisdom exists (Ecclesiastes 9:10). Most significantly, Sheol is a place where no one praises God (Psalm 6:5; 88:10–11; 115:17; Isaiah 38:18).
In the New Testament, the most extended depiction of the afterlife is found in Luke 16:19–31. There we learn that, like the Hades of Greek mythology, the biblical Sheol has two compartments: Hades proper (where the rich man is sent, Luke 16:23) and “Abraham’s bosom” (where the angels carry Lazarus, Luke 16:22). Hades proper is a place of torment, where fire causes anguish to the souls imprisoned there. Abraham’s bosom, on the other hand, while within shouting distance of Hades, is separated from it by a great chasm (Luke 16:26), and is, like the Greek Elysium, a place of comfort and rest.
While much mystery remains, the picture begins to take shape. All dead souls go down to Sheol/hades, but Sheol is divided into two distinct sides, one for the righteous and one for the wicked. The righteous who died prior to Christ dwelt in Sheol with Abraham, and though they were cut off from the land of the living (and therefore from the worship of Yahweh on earth), they were not tormented as the wicked were.
http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/he-descended-into-hell (continued):
ReplyDeleteWhat, then, does this tell us about where Jesus was on Holy Saturday? Based on Jesus’s words to the thief on the cross in Luke 23:43, some Christians believe that after his death, Jesus’s soul went to heaven to be in the presence of the Father. But Luke 23:43 doesn’t say that Jesus would be in the presence of God; it says he would be in the presence of the thief (“Today you will be with me in Paradise”), and based on the Old Testament and Luke 16, it seems likely that the now-repentant thief would be at Abraham’s side, a place of comfort and rest for the righteous dead, which Jesus here calls “Paradise.”
Following his death for sin, then, Jesus journeys to Hades, to the City of Death, and rips its gates off the hinges. He liberates Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, David, John the Baptist, and the rest of the Old Testament faithful, ransoming them from the power of Sheol (Psalm 49:15; 86:13; 89:48). They had waited there for so long, not having received what was promised, so that their spirits would be made perfect along with the saints of the new covenant (Hebrews 11:39–40; 12:23).
After his resurrection, Jesus ascends to heaven and brings the ransomed dead with him, so that now Paradise is no longer down near the place of torment, but is up in the third heaven, the highest heaven, where God dwells (2 Corinthians 12:2–4).
Now, in the church age, when the righteous die, they aren’t merely carried by angels to Abraham’s bosom; they depart to be with Christ, which is far better (Philippians 1:23). The wicked, however, remain in Hades in torment, until the final judgment, when Hades gives up the dead who dwell there, and they are judged according to their deeds, and then Death and Hades are thrown into Hell, into the lake of fire (Revelation 20:13–15).
What implications does this have for Holy Week? Christ’s journey to Hades demonstrates that he was indeed made like us in every way. Not only did he bear the wrath of God on our behalf; he endured death, the separation of his soul from his body. His body was in Joseph’s tomb (Luke 23:50–53), and his soul was three days in Sheol, in the heart of the earth (Matthew 12:40).
But as Psalm 16 makes clear, Jesus is not only like us, but different. Jesus’s body was buried, like ours, but it did not decay. Jesus’s soul went to Hades, like the Old Testament saints, but wasn’t abandoned there. God raised him from the dead, reunited his soul with a now-glorified body, so that he is the firstfruits of the resurrection harvest.
And this is good news for us, because those in Christ now bypass the land of forgetfulness, where no one praises God. Instead, when we die, we join with the angelic choir and the saints of old to sing praises to the Lamb who was slain for us and our salvation.
My 2 cents on the previous article:
ReplyDeleteI think this is how most people understand what happened when Jesus died. However, most of the Biblical references quoted were either from poetry or parables. I really don't think we can draw that detailed of story from the Bible verses mentioned.
My main problem with this (besides the large "reach") is that it doesn't really explain how Jesus was punished for our sins. He suffered on the cross. But I don't think that is our punishment. Our punishment is eternal separation from God (whether conscious or unconscious). How did Jesus take that upon Himself. I think spending a day and half in Abraham's Bosum wouldn't satisfy God's punishment on sin.
https://carm.org/christianity/christian-doctrine/where-did-jesus-go-after-he-died-cross says:
ReplyDeleteThe Bible does not specifically state what happened to Jesus immediately after He died on the cross. Because of this, there is debate surrounding the answer to the question of where He went and what He did. So, I will present differing views so you might know the scope of the answer and decide for yourself which position is preferable.
Perhaps the best-known scripture that appears to deal with this issue is found in 1 Pet. 3:18-20,
"For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, in order that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; 19 in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, 20 who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water."
When Jesus was made alive in the spirit, it is not saying that His spirit died, and then it became alive again. "Made alive in the spirit" is contrasted with "put to death in the flesh." He first lived as mortal men but " . . . He began to live a spiritual 'resurrection' life, whereby He has the power to bring us to God."1 Furthermore, some Bibles (NIV, KJV, and NKJV) render the verse as "made alive by the Spirit" referring to the Holy Spirit's work with Christ. “By the Spirit” translates one word, pneumati, which could refer to the third Person of the Trinity as the agent of Christ’s resurrection.
One view where Jesus was and what He did before His resurrection is that He went to Hades (the place of the dead) and made proclamation to those who were in spiritual prison. Therefore, it is most probable that Jesus was not preaching the gospel to those in Hades/Spirit prison so they could be saved but was instead proclaiming the truth to them. After all, the Bible says, "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment," (Heb. 9:27).
But who were the ones in spiritual prison? Some believe it is the people who were alive at the time of Noah's flood and who were killed in the flood. Others believe it is all humanity who died before the time of the cross.
Needless to say, this passage also raises many questions and much debate can be found as to its precise meaning. Nevertheless, as far as the other option goes, that Jesus simply presented the facts concerning His work on the cross to those in spiritual prison, we can look to Eph. 4:8-10 for possible support.
"When He ascended on high, He led captive a host of captives, and He gave gifts to men. 9 Now this expression, 'He ascended,' what does it mean except that He also had descended into the lower parts of the earth? 10 He who descended is Himself also He who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things . . . "
Some theologians believe that during the three days between Jesus' crucifixion and resurrection, He descended into Abraham's bosom (Luke 16:19-31),3 proclaimed to them the mystery of the gospel, and then led them into heaven to dwell with God. The belief is that they were not permitted to enter into the presence of God in heaven until after the atonement. Once that had happened, Jesus, who had died, descended to Abraham's bosom, proclaimed the gospel, and then led its residents into heaven.
So, even though we cannot precisely determine where Jesus was and what He did during those three days, it seems apparent that He presented the gospel message (not to have them get saved) to those in spirit prison and possibly also to those in Abraham's bosom.
https://bible.org/question/where-did-christ-go-after-he-died-and-he-rose-dead says:
ReplyDeleteSome use Ephesians 4:7-10 to teach that Jesus went to hell or to Hades to release the prisoners held there and take them to heaven or into God’s presence. The idea is that before His death, all Old Testament believers were in Abraham’s bosom—the paradise part of Hades. Hades or Sheol was seen as the place of the dead with three areas or compartments: (1) the abyss or tartarus, the place of confinement for those demons who sinned in the days of Noah; (2) torments, the place of suffering for all unbelievers until the time of the resurrection of the unjust and the Great White Throne Judgment when they will be cast eternally into the lake of fire, and (3) a third place separated by a great gulf (see Luke 16), called Abraham’s Bosom, the place of blessing for believers. Because Christ had not yet died to pay the penalty for their sin, they were not yet able to go directly into the presence of God. After His death, however, the barrier was removed and He took them out of prison and into God’s presence.
The Ephesians passage, however, refers only to His descent to earth and perhaps to the grave: “of the earth” is better understood as an appositional phrase meaning that Christ descended (at His incarnation) into the lower parts (of the universe), namely, the earth at His incarnation, or perhaps even into the grave in His burial following His death on the cross. The prisoners He took are not the OT believers confined in Paradise, but those Jesus defeated by His death and resurrection. In keeping with the analogy of the Roman Triumph Paul had in mind, it refers to Satan and his demon host (see Col. 2:14-15).
1 Peter 3:18-20 is another passage that is often used in this regard because it seems to refer to Christ’s spirit proclaiming His victory over death to those demons who were bound in the abyss. This passage could possibly refer to a glorious proclamation He made by His human spirit while His body lay in the grave, but Bible students and scholars are divided on this issue.
As to paradise or Abraham’s bosom, the gulf fixed separating the two compartments in heaven is probably the heavens themselves. Remember that Elijah was taken up into heaven. Because of the need of Christ’s death to remove the barrier, Old Testament saints may not have been allowed into the direct presence of God, but Sheol or Hades for them (the place of the dead) was a paradise and in the third heaven somewhere. Remember that Sheol or Hades refers to the place of the dead and the exact condition and location (heaven or hell) depends on whether a text is referring to believers or unbelievers. Sometimes, depending on context, it refers simply to the grave.
http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html says:
ReplyDeleteIn the Hebrew Scriptures, the word used to describe the realm of the dead is sheol. It simply means “the place of the dead” or “the place of departed souls/spirits.” The New Testament Greek equivalent of sheol is hades, which also refers to “the place of the dead.” Other Scriptures in the New Testament indicate that sheol/hades is a temporary place, where souls are kept as they await the final resurrection and judgment. Revelation 20:11–15 gives a clear distinction between hades and the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the permanent and final place of judgment for the lost. Hades, then, is a temporary place. Many people refer to both hades and the lake of fire as “hell,” and this causes confusion. Jesus did not go to a place of torment after His death, but He did go to hades.
Some have the viewpoint that Jesus went to “hell” or the suffering side of sheol/hades in order to further be punished for our sins. This idea is completely unbiblical. It was the death of Jesus on the cross that sufficiently provided for our redemption. It was His shed blood that effected our own cleansing from sin (1 John 1:7–9). As He hung there on the cross, He took the sin burden of the whole human race upon Himself. He became sin for us: “God made him who had no sin to be sin for us, so that in him we might become the righteousness of God” (2 Corinthians 5:21). This imputation of sin helps us understand Christ’s struggle in the garden of Gethsemane with the cup of sin which would be poured out upon Him on the cross.
As Jesus neared death, He said, “It is finished” (John 19:30). His suffering in our place was completed. His soul/spirit went to hades (the place of the dead). Jesus did not go to “hell” or the suffering side of hades; He went to “Abraham’s side” or the blessed side of hades. Jesus’ suffering ended the moment He died. The payment for sin was paid. He then awaited the resurrection of His body and His return to glory in His ascension. Did Jesus go to hell? No. Did Jesus go to sheol/hades? Yes.
http://www.compellingtruth.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html says:
ReplyDeleteA common teaching is that Jesus was in hell between the time He died on the cross and when He was resurrected. The issue has been complicated by a clause in the Apostles' Creed (which is not part of the Bible). The creed states, "He descended into hell." Did Jesus really go to the place of suffering and torment called "hell"?
First, let's look at the verses used to claim Jesus did enter hell after His death on the cross. Ephesians 4:8-10 reads, "Therefore it says, 'When he ascended on high he led a host of captives, and he gave gifts to men.' (In saying, 'He ascended,' what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth? He who descended is the one who also ascended far above all the heavens, that he might fill all things.)"
These verses actually quote Psalm 68:18. The controversy centers on the destination of Jesus' descent. Did He descend to hell or to the earth? The ESV provides a literal translation, "the lower regions, the earth," to make this distinction clearer. The passage says Jesus descended to the earth (at His Incarnation). The passage does not teach that Jesus descended to hell.
Another passage is Psalm 16:10-11: "For you will not abandon my soul to Sheol, or let your holy one see corruption. You make known to me the path of life." Some take this passage to refer to Jesus entering hell (Sheol) before His resurrection. This interpretation is due, in large part, to the King James Version, which translates Sheol as "hell" in this passage. However, the Hebrew word sheol is a general reference to the grave, not a particular place in the afterlife.
In Matthew 12:40 Jesus says He will go to the "heart of the earth" just like Jonah went to the belly of the whale. However, here Jesus was speaking of death or the grave, not a particular location in the afterlife. To claim this speaks of Jesus going to hell pushes the analogy too far.
A final passage often used in this discussion is 1 Peter 3:18-20: "For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water." Some think this refers to Jesus speaking to human beings in hell after His death on the cross. Others think it refers to Christ's spirit speaking in the days of Noah to warn of impending judgment and offer salvation to Noah and his family. But it is more likely that it refers to Christ pronouncing His victory over the demonic spirits who are bound in the abyss (see Luke 8:31; Jude 1:6; Revelation 9:11).
The view of Jesus descending to hell is negated by the words of Jesus Himself. On the cross, Jesus cried out, "It is finished!" (John 19:30). His suffering was over; there was no more payment needed for salvation. Also just before His death, Jesus said, "Father, into your hands I commit my spirit" (Luke 23:46). Upon death, His spirit went to the Father, not to hell. Also, Jesus promised the thief on the cross that they would be together today in paradise (Luke 23:43). This could not have happened if Jesus had spent three days in hell.
The clause "He descended into hell" in the Apostles' Creed may have been well intended, but is so controversial that some denominations consider it optional or even exclude that portion of the creed. Jesus' body was in the grave for three days, but He did not go to hell.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/apostles_creed.cfm says:
ReplyDeleteThere are a number of passages from which the teaching arises, but primarily, theologues will use verses from Matthew 12:38-41, Romans 10:7, and Ephesians 4:7-10 to demonstrate Christ's descent to hell. In Matthew 12:40, Jesus compares himself to Jonah proclaiming, "As Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth." And clearly, when Christ died, he gave up his spirit (John 19:30). But to where did his spirit go?
In the end, it comes down to understanding what Scripture means when it speaks of Christ descending into the lower parts of the earth (or the heart of the earth). His soul spent three days and three nights in that abode. Almost unanimously, this deep part of the earth is interpreted as signifying the netherworld (i.e., that place wherein the spirits of the dead make their abode) — hell didn't begin to take on its modern meaning conoting that particular location wherein the damned are punished eternally until quite recently. There are a number of directions Christians depart at this point — and that is what is the activity in which Christ was engaged these three days.
There are three notable perspectives:
Christ spent his three days suffering the wrath of God.
Christ spent his three days proclaiming his victory over the Satanic kingdom.
Christ spent his three days preaching the Gospel to the Old Testament believers who dwelt in a separated portion of the netherworld.
The first position benefits from the comparison between Jonah and Christ. It is not difficult to see that just as Jonah spent his time in suffering in the deep (or the grave), so too might not have Christ suffered in the land of the dead? Peter claims in Acts 2:24 that Christ, by his resurrection, was loosed from the pangs of death, "because it was not possible for him to be held or conquered by them" — meaning that until he arose, Christ laboured under the throes of death. He suffered then, in this case, that we, his sheep, might be spared such.
The second perspective presents a more cheery picture — Christ descending into the depths of hell to proclaim his Gospel victory. Satan defeated. Death defeated. And the Lord of life victorious and boasting in triumph! A beautiful picture. Unfortunately, there seems little evidence from Scripture that this occurred during the three days and three nights, and it presumes that Satan and his fallen angels make their abode in "the heart of the earth" — something else not really stated in Scripture.
The third and final position that we will here look at arrives from a difficulty in interpreting 1 Peter 3:18-20. Christ, it is supposed, entered into the depths to proclaim the Gospel to Old Covenant believers. The biggest question burdening such an interpretation is one of motivation: why did Christ specially go to preach to those who already believed? All of the Old Testament saints had already received the Gospel by grace through faith. It was accounted them as righteousness. So then, why? While Christ may indeed have preached the Gospel so, it certainly doesn't seem necessary.
In the end, true saints believe along a number of different interpretive lines at this point. The Christian's solemn and joyous duty then is to allow the Scriptures to speak for themselves. But as this is not a matter of division, every Christian should allow his brother some breadth in his interpretation, always maintaining godly fellowship borne in love and charity.
http://www.whatchristianswanttoknow.com/does-the-bible-tell-us-where-jesus-was-the-three-days-between-his-death-and-resurrection/ says:
ReplyDeleteThose who died in the flood had the judgment of God on them through the flood, however this is inconsistent with many Scriptures in the Bible like Hebrews 9:27 which says, “And just as it is appointed for man to die once, and after that comes judgment.” It does not say after death they will have another chance. Were these who perished in the flood the ones that Peter referred to as the ones being “in prison?” It does not seem to fit in these verses or in the context of biblical doctrine.
Jesus was said to have made a proclamation “to the spirits now in prison.” Nowhere in the Bible are humans referred to as “spirits” so this seems to refer to demon spirits that are bound in the abyss and these demons are the fallen angels who were permanently bound because of heinous wickedness.
https://www.probe.org/why-did-jesus-have-to-go-to-hell-after-he-died/ says:
ReplyDeleteFirst, we need to make a distinction between the Apostles’ Creed and scripture. Scripture is inspired; the creed, while based on scripture, is not. Secondly, you may be surprised to learn (as was I) that the Apostles’ Creed does not date back to the time of the apostles, but was a “work in progress,” developing gradually from about A.D. 200 to 750. Before 650, the phrase “descended into hell” only appeared in one version of the creed, in 390, written by a man who understood it to mean simply that Christ was buried—He “descended into the grave.” (Wayne Grudem, Bible Doctrine, p. 174)
In defending this part of the creed, these scriptures have been offered:
Acts 2:31 (KJV) He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.
The problem is that the Greek word translated in the KJV “hell” is actually “Hades,” which means “the place of the dead.” The word that definitively refers to hell, “gehenna,” isn’t used here.
1 Pet 3:18-19 For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison…
The context indicates that the “spirits in prison” may have been disobedient demons from Noah’s time, to whom Jesus went and made proclamation—what, we’re not told. The Greek word for preached means “proclaimed,” not evangelized. This may well indicate that He visited the demons in their holding cells after His death, but that’s not the same thing as experiencing hell after His death.
When we look at what the scripture says about where Jesus went after his death, what we see is:
1. He told the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in paradise.” After His death, Jesus knew He would be in heaven and see the repentant and newly converted thief there.
2. Some of His last words on the cross were, “It is finished.” He had already suffered hell—separation from his Father—while hanging on the cross. His work was over and so was the torment of being under the Father’s wrath and alienation.
3. Just before dying, He said, “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit,” indicating that He expected the Father to receive Him when he died.
There is clearly a mystery here, in view of the 1 Peter passage, and I don’t think any of us will figure it out this side of heaven.
http://apologeticspress.org/apcontent.aspx?category=10&article=851 says:
ReplyDeleteIn 1 Peter 3:18-20, a most curious reference appears on the surface to be an affirmation that Jesus descended into the spirit realm and preached to deceased people. However, a close consideration of the grammar will clarify the passage. First, the preaching referred to was not done by Jesus in His own person. The text says Jesus did the preaching through the Holy Spirit: “…the Spirit, by whom…” (v. 18-19). [“My Spirit” (Genesis 6:3) = the Spirit of God = the Spirit of Christ (Romans 8:9; Ephesians 2:17).] Other passages confirm that Jesus was said to do things that He actually did through the instrumentality of others (John 4:1-2; Ephesians 2:17). Nathan charged King David: “You have killed Uriah the Hittite with the sword” (2 Samuel 12:9), when, in fact, David had ordered it done by another. Elijah accused Ahab of killing Naboth, using the words, “Have you murdered and also taken possession?” (1 Kings 21:19), even though his wife, Jezebel, arranged for two other men to accomplish the evil action. Paul said Jesus preached peace to the Gentiles (Ephesians 2:17), when, in fact, Jesus did so through others, since He, Himself, already had returned to heaven when the first Gentiles heard the Gospel (Acts 15:7). So the Bible frequently refers to someone doing something that he, in fact, did through the agency of another person.
In fact, within the book of 1 Peter itself, Peter already had made reference to the fact that the Spirit “testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow” (1 Peter 1:11). But it was the prophets who did the actual speaking (vs. 10). Then, again in chapter 4, Peter stated that “the gospel was preached also to those who are dead” (1 Peter 4:6). Here were individuals who had the Gospel preached to them while they were alive (“in the flesh”), and who responded favorably by becoming Christians. But then they were “judged according to men in the flesh,” i.e., they were treated harshly and condemned to martyrdom by their contemporaries. At the time Peter was writing, they were “dead,” i.e., deceased and departed from the Earth. But Peter said they “live according to God in the spirit,” i.e., they were alive and well in spirit form in the hadean realm in God’s good graces.
Second, when did Jesus do this preaching through the Holy Spirit? Notice in verse 20, the words “formerly” (NKJV) and “when”—“when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah.” So the preaching was done in the days of Noah by Jesus through the Holy Spirit Who, in turn, inspired Noah’s preaching (2 Peter 2:5).
Fourth, why would Jesus go to hades and preach only to Noah’s contemporaries? Why would He exclude those who died prior to the Flood? What about those who have died since? Since God is no “respecter of persons” (Acts 10:34; Romans 2:11), Jesus would not have singled out Noah’s generation to be the recipients of preaching in the spirit realm.
Fifth, what would have been the content of such preaching? Jesus could not have preached the whole Gospel in its entirety. That Gospel includes the resurrection of Jesus (Romans 4:25; 1 Corinthians 15:4). However, at the time the alleged preaching was supposed to have occurred, Jesus had not yet been raised!
The notion of people being given a second opportunity to hear the Gospel in the afterlife is an extremely dangerous doctrine that is counterproductive to the cause of Christ. Why? It potentially could make people think they can postpone their obedience to the Gospel in this life. Yet the Bible consistently teaches that no one will be permitted a second chance. This earthly life has been provided by God for all human beings to determine where they wish to spend eternity. That decision is made by each individual based upon personal conduct. Once a person dies, his eternal destiny has been cinched. He is “reserved for judgment” (2 Peter 2:4; cf. vss. 9,17). His condition will not and cannot be altered—even by God Himself (Luke 16:25-26; Hebrews 9:27).
http://www.thingsrevealed.net/jesus-victor.htm says:
ReplyDeleteIf Jesus was God and died on the cross, does that mean that God died?
According to the Bible, Jesus was God manifest in human flesh. (John1:14; 1Tim 3:16; Philippians 2:5-8). When Jesus died, he died a man’s death and because he was the one and only righteous man and the one and only righteous God, "it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him" (Acts 2:22-24). Though it was impossible for God to die (Psalm 102:25-27), it was not impossible for God to take on humanity in order to die a man’s death as our substitute (1Tim 2:5,6).
How could the death of Jesus for three days in the grave pay for the eternal death required in hell for all mankind?
First we need to understand that Jesus fully paid the penalty for our sins through his death on the cross. When Jesus died he said, "It is finished" (John 19:31). "It," in this case, was the work of redemption, which was fully completed by Christ’s death on the cross. He did not have to suffer in hell for eternity—or even for three days—in order to add to what he had already accomplished on the cross.
Next we need to understand that the Bible does not teach that death in hell for eternity is like a prison sentence for a crime. What could one ever do to pay for or make restitution for a sin? Further, no one will find themselves in hell for reasons they do not understand. The reason will be well known and grievous to them on the day of judgement. They will all know that they had rejected whatever light God gave in order to restore a right relationship with Him (Psalm 19:1-4; Acts 14:16,17; Acts 17:23-31; John 3:16-20).
Therefore, Jesus’ payment must not be seen as equal to our own penalty, or even that of all mankind. The penalty due for our sin was not placed on a balance scale with the death of Christ on the other side. What we must realize is that the sinless life of Jesus Christ was of infinite worth, while the eternal suffering of the unbeliever is nothing but the natural consequence of refusal to receive the free gift of eternal life in Jesus Christ. In the end, only the Christian can begin to understand the value of this gift and will exclaim, "Thanks be to God for his indescribable gift!" (2 Corinthians 9:15 NIV).
Did Jesus really go to hell and, if so, what did he do there?
(Standard answer explained in previous articles - this one saying Jesus went to Abraham's bosum with the O.T. saints).
Since we often hear that death is separation from God, was Jesus separated from God for the three days he was in the grave?
Since God "made him (Jesus) to be sin for us, who knew no sin" (2 Corinthians 5:21 KJV), and because God’s "eyes are too pure to look on evil" (Habakkuk 1:13 NIV), Jesus suffered separation from his Father while on the cross. Many believe that is the symbolic meaning behind the 3-hour darkness while Jesus suffered on the cross. (Mark 15:34). Whatever meaning we may draw out of these events, Jesus did cry, "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" (Mark 15:34 NIV). But once again, with Jesus’ last breath he said, "It is finished." Jesus did not pay for our sins in hell. He paid for our sins with his sinless life on the cross and therefore no other payment was required. Jesus did not go to hell to pay for our sins; he went to Hades "to proclaim freedom for the captives and release from darkness for the prisoners" (Isaiah 61:1 NIV; see Ephesians 4:8) and make "proclamation to the spirits now in prison" (1 Peter 3:18-20 NASB).
http://www.ligonier.org/learn/devotionals/christs-descent-into-hell/ says:
ReplyDeleteThroughout the course of church history, many people have taught that Jesus’ spirit descended into hell after His death on the cross. Basing this idea on Ephesians 4:8–10 and 1 Peter 3:18–20, most of those who have taught that Jesus’ spirit went to hell after His death have said that He went there to proclaim judgment to sinners and/or rescue the saints of the Old Testament. Today, many in the heretical Word of Faith movement teach that the crucifixion was insufficient to atone for our sins and that Jesus also had to suffer three days of torment in hell.
Faithfulness to all of Scripture, however, requires us to deny that Jesus’ spirit went to hell after He died. First, Jesus told the repentant thief on the cross that he would be with Christ in Paradise on the same day of their crucifixion (Luke 23:39– 43). Second, nothing in Ephesians 4:8–10 says Jesus descended into hell; Paul means only that Christ descended into the grave. Third, 1 Peter 3:18–20 likely refers to the Son of God preaching by the Holy Spirit through Noah to the people of Noah’s day. Finally, Jesus finished His atoning work on the cross. The New Testament speaks of propitiation, the turning away of the Lord’s wrath, only in relation to Jesus shedding His blood on the cross (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 2:17; 9:1–10:18; 1 John 2:2; 4:10; 5:6–11). Moreover, our Savior’s last words on the cross were “It is finished” (John 19:30). He saw His work as completed when He died.
Jesus’ spirit never went to hell, but on the cross He suffered the full wrath of God that is poured out in hell. True, the scourgings of the guards, the nails in Christ’s hands, and the other physical pains Jesus suffered manifested God’s wrath. Nevertheless, the most intense suffering Christ experienced was spiritual in nature, the hopelessness of losing the gaze of His Father’s blessing and the torment of experiencing God’s wrath for the sins of His people (Mark 15:34). John Calvin comments, “After explaining what Christ endured in the sight of man, the Creed appropriately adds the invisible and incomprehensible judgment which he endured before God, to teach us that not only was the body of Christ given up as the price of redemption, but that there was a greater and more excellent price — that he bore in his soul the tortures of a condemned and ruined man” (Institutes 2.16.10).
Sin against an infinite being demands an infinite punishment in hell. In a few hours, Jesus suffered and exhausted the infinite punishment that impenitent people cannot exhaust even after an eternity in hell. He could do this because, in His deity as the Son of God, He is an infinite being. This is a great mystery, but as the Heidelberg Catechism states, it does assure us that we are fully delivered from the anguish and torment of hell in Christ (Q&A 44).
http://rightreason.org/2011/nuts-and-bolts-012-kenosis/ says:
ReplyDeleteThis time I’m looking at kenosis (also referred to less elegantly as kenoticism). Unfortunately, this is one of those terms which in some contexts generates more heat than light. If you search the internet for the term it’s likely that some of the first results you’ll find are extreme statements about the “heresy of kenosis.” Today I found one gem, for example, which claims that “The doctrinal heresy known as Kenoticism originated in the nineteenth century by the German theologians.”
Kenosis, however, is neither heretical nor German, and certainly did not arise in the nineteenth century, even though some nineteenth century German theologians may have formulated the idea in ways that others had not. Far from being an invention of modern Europe, kenosis has a long history in Eastern Orthodox Christianity, a significant branch of the church that many moderns are frankly ignorant of (moderns often including myself).
Even some websites that appear more respectable describe kenosis in terms that are not entirely fair, such as: “Kenotics take the word “kenoo” to indicate that Jesus Christ literally emptied himself. Therefore, they conclude he was not God while he was here on earth for 33 years.” But this is not what they conclude. Kenosis need not involve the belief that Jesus ceased to be divine in the incarnation. Certainly, you could maintain that Jesus did set aside his divinity and call it kenosis, because that is an emptying of sorts, it is an extreme kind of kenosis. Instead, the (in my view biblical) doctrine of Christ’s emptying himself is that in becoming human, Christ gave up much of what he, as fully divine, had a right to. He did not simply have his omnipotence and omniscience at his disposal throughout his earthy life, choosing never to make use of it. He actually set those things aside and genuinely took the form of a servant. It was not an act or a ruse. The incarnation, in short, was genuinely as it appeared to be.
http://rightreason.org/2011/nuts-and-bolts-012-kenosis/ (continued):
ReplyDeleteIn the incarnation, kenosis says, Christ made himself powerless compared to what he was entitled to be. Paul wrote that although Christ had the true form (morphe) of God, he emptied (Greek: ekenosen) himself and took the form of a servant. Contrasting himself with his Father, he claimed that of his future coming (setting aside for now the question of exactly what that referred to), nobody knows the day or the hour, “not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only” (Matthew 24:36). This was not false modesty on Jesus’ part. Nor does it make sense to say that really Jesus was all knowing here, but he was simply setting aside his ability to know everything, or limiting his knowledge. For whatever reason, to have limited knowledge is to not be all knowing. There is no meaningful distinction between temporarily limiting one’s knowledge of all things and temporarily giving up one’s knowledge of all things. Either Jesus knew all things, or he did not, and the New Testament tells us that he did not. Simply denying kenosis altogether has what I take to be bizarre and counterintuitive consequences. Consider Jesus in the womb of Mary for nine months. Denying kenosis altogether would have us think that an omnipotent, omniscient Jesus was throughout that nine months fully conscious aware, sitting back inside the developing body, waiting. His sleeping every night was a mere illusion, he didn’t really have to eat (since he never gave up immortality), he didn’t actually have to learn to read (since he knew all things, but simply chose not to exploit that knowledge), and when he asked questions in everyday conversation, it was not because he wanted to know the answer but was simply being polite – since he really knew the answers but chose not to make use of that fact. Kenosis takes seriously Jesus’ claim that “I can do nothing on my own” (John 5:30). Throughout his earthly life, Jesus, although truly divine, gave up the power that was rightly his and lived a life of dependence on his Father, in the power of the Holy Spirit. This is what made the cross so devastating for him. As one who was truly dependent on God the Father, his cry that his Father had abandoned him was all the more harrowing.
In kenosis, Jesus is presented to us as the God who truly, not just in appearances, was “made like his brothers in every way” (Heb. 2:17), who truly stood in our place and tasted death for us, and who actually knows what it is like to be one of us. Kenosis provides us with a powerful antidote to some of the gnostic tendencies that developed in the second century. Gnostic theology wanted to deny that Jesus was truly God in the flesh, because it was beneath God to actually suffer and die. One such Gnostic tactic was to make Jesus a mere man upon whom the spirit of Christ descended at his baptism, that spirit departing at the cross. Kenosis stands at the opposite end of the theological spectrum: God could not only die in Christ, but God was willing to give up the privileges that come with being God, not clinging to the dignity and glory that he deserved, becoming a limited and at times helpless servant.
I think kenosis makes a lot of sense.
ReplyDeletePhil 2:6, 7 are key verses in understanding this. What does grasping and emptying himself mean? That he gave up his omnipotence, omniscience, and so on while he was incarnated here on earth. This answers why Jesus hid from those seeking to harm him (John 8:59) and why Jesus would need angels to protect him (Ps 81:11).
Luke 2:52 says "And Jesus increased in wisdom and in stature and in favor with God and man." How is it possible to "increase in wisdom" if one is simply hiding the knowledge? I might hide my knowledge by making an F on a test but would I really be increasing in knowledge in the class if I truly already knew everything about the subject being taught? Of course not.
It is important to point out the straw man thrown against kenosis. Kenosis does not deny Christ's divinity as the Pope charged in his criticism of 1951 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenosis#Protestantism). That would be a heresy but that is not what kenosis says.
https://www.quora.com/Where-did-Jesus-go-after-he-died-but-before-he-returned says:
ReplyDeleteJesus Didn't go anywhere. He actually died. The scriptures tell us that death is like sleeping. All those who are dead or who have ever died are experiencing unconsciousness. They are not "alive" somewhere else. No one awakes from death until Jesus Christ resurrects them.
John 3:13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.
Jesus Christ is the only one so far that has been resurrected from death (unconsciousness). Everyone else that has died, is currently still dead, they are not living somewhere else.
1Co 15:16 For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised:
1Co 15:17 And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins.
1Co 15:18 Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
Paul saw the Truth about the need for a resurrection. "If Christ be not risen... then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished."
Now as for the "spirits in prison" that some have referred to in this thread, these were the spirits of the people of Noah's time. That is why we are told that this took place "in the days of Noah while the ark was preparing."
1 peter 3:18-20 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
It was Jesus Christ who preached through Noah for one hundred and twenty years. The people of Noah's day were captives and prisoners to sin just as much as were the people of Christ's day.
Luk 4:18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,
Jesus preached to the captives in prison through his prophet Noah "in the days of Noah". He didn't go there after He died on the cross. Jesus was dead for 3 days. He really did die, He was not alive somewhere else.
https://carm.org/did-jesus-die-spiritually says:
ReplyDeleteThere are many Christian preachers today who teach that Jesus died spiritually. As defined by them, this concept is a false doctrine. They are saying that Jesus died on the cross then went to hell where he finished the atoning work. This is a denial of the sufficiency of the cross. Some say that Jesus also lost his divine nature and adopted the nature of Satan while in hell. This denies the deity of Christ. Others teach that Jesus had to be born again. This is a denial of the holiness of Christ's nature. Whichever variation is adopted, it is still wrong. The truth is that Jesus finished the atoning work on the cross, never stopped being divine, did not suffer in hell, and did not need to be born again.
We can clearly see that John 19:30 tells us Christ's atoning work was finished on the cross. Colossians 2:14 tells us that the sin debt was cancelled on the cross. If Christ atoning work was finished on the cross and the sin debt was canceled on the cross, then there's no need for Jesus to go to hell to finish anything or suffer in our place--since it was all done on the cross. Furthermore, none of the verses they used to support the idea that Jesus went to hell and suffered remotely suggest that was the case.
My 2 cents:
ReplyDeleteWhat happens to us after death? What happened to Jesus after death? How does this affect the gospel? Did Jesus do anything for us after His death, or was all His work finished on the cross? How and for how long was Jesus separated from God?
The most common answer to this is that Jesus went to Hades, which is where all people go to live a conscious existence - some to paradise and some to torment. They remain there until God's final judgement.
The whole problem with this, and why I don't necessarily buy it, is that it is heavily influenced by pagan Greek thought. We are steeped in it. Even when people attempt to explain it, they directly refer to Greek philosophy. Why would the truth be something that Greek pagans came up with?
So, I think there's only one thing to do. Drop all preconceived notions, go through all the verses in the Bible addressing the topic, list them, and list all the possible explanations for them. I wouldn't do this if it wasn't important. The answer could affect how we present and think about the gospel itself.
After 3 months of work, here is the result of my research on this topic. You can see the full article at http://soulguardian.info/bible/Bible%20Study/JesusDeathVerses.txt
DeleteThis article lists all the verses I could find on death, souls and what Jesus did for us. It's definitely open for peer review. Please feel free to comment on what is written and especially mention any pertinent verses that I omitted.
For those of you who don't want to wade through the entire thing, here is my intro and conclusion. All the rest of the material is made up of Bible verses and possible interpretations. Begin -------------
DeleteTo start to answer the question about what happened to Jesus between the time He died and was resurrected, other questions need to be explored. What is the nature of the soul and/or spirit? What is hell and/or Hades? What happens to people after they die?
- It's clear that Christian thought has been deeply corrupted by Greek thinking (such as the Hellenistic religion). It is there, we picked up the cartoon world dualistic ideas of heaven, hell, souls, etc. You can see this influence in many modern Christian authors/bloggers, who attempt to overlay this world view onto the Bible. A little open-minded examination of the Bible pretty quickly dispels that world-view.
- People do not go to heaven or hell when they die. It is not until Judgement Day that people will be resurrected and receive Heaven or Hell as their reward. (Exception: Revelation 20:5 seems to indicate that there will be a small subset of believers who will be resurrected before Judgement Day right before the Millennium).
---continued next
---my article continued----
Delete- What are "souls" or spirits? There seems to be a lot of evidence that souls/spirits lose consciousness upon death. Furthermore, a decent case can be made that souls are linked to the body and have no after-life apart from the body (in other words, they cease to exist upon death).
People with the "souls are limited to life" view look to Genesis 2:7 for the definition of the soul - "7 then the Lord God formed the man of dust from the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living creature.". They believe that the soul is the life force (for lack of a better term) that God breathed into us. Upon death, that life force expires and/or returns to God.
The main argument for the existence of (unconscious) souls apart from the body seems to be in two areas:
a. Speaking with the dead. There are Old Testament laws against speaking with the dead, and there is a specific example of the Witch of Endor bringing up Samuel to speak with Saul (I Samuel 28:11-15). If people actually speak to dead people, then dead souls can be woken and communicated with - which would indicate that the dead leave behind "shades". However, a perfectly good argument can be made that these shades are not the souls of dead humans at all, but evil spirits masquerading as human souls. There was an ancient practice of communicating (and worshipping, in some cases) the "dead". It's very possible that God was prohibiting this custom, without explaining what was going on in the background.
I question why the Bible would relate this story and not specify that Samuel was in fact an evil spirit? It seems to do the opposite. On the other hand, there is very few other verses (if any) dealing with conscious souls after death. All the verses speaking about life after death concern the resurrection of the dead on the Last Day. If souls had some kind of existence before the Resurrection, why doesn't the Bible make specific mention of it?
b. Matthew 10:28: "And do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. Rather fear him who can destroy both soul and body in hell". If the soul dies upon death, why do people not have the power to kill the soul? It's possible to think that this is distinguishing between the first and second deaths - the first death being here one earth and the second death as taking place after Judgement. Men have the power to cause the first death, but only God has the power to determine whether we will experience the second death, where our bodies and souls will be destroyed in Hell.
People use other verses in the Bible to try to prove the existence of souls after death, such as the parable of the rich man and Lazarus and Jesus saying to the thief that today he will be with him in paradise. However, these all have reasonable explanations as to why the Bible is not advocating the existence of separate souls.
In conclusion, based on all the verses, I am convinced that souls have no conscious existence after death (and before the Resurrection). It is possible that souls do exist in an unconscious state (and can be woken, for example). Assuming I'm right, the question of whether souls "exist" in an unconscious state after death or are annihilated is mostly moot. I believe that we don't have enough data to distinguish the truth between these two moot options.
My final point (on this sub-topic) is to traditionalists. We must realize that our thinking has been corrupted by Greek thought. The non-traditionalist thinkers in this area (namely annihilationists and conditionalists) have real and valid points. We can learn a lot from them. Or, at the very least, we should use this point to further distinguish "gospel truth" from "our traditions".
---continued next
---my article continued----
Delete- Now we get to the question of what happened to Jesus when He died. The main question for me is how did Jesus suffering and/or death pay the price? How does substitional atonement work? Presumably, if Jesus had not paid the price for us, we would have to pay it. What is that price? Why did Jesus have to be tortured before He died? Is that the price we would have paid? Why didn't Jesus just have to be killed, or even be a human sacrifice?
I think the key is to look at the Old Testament sacrificial system. In the Old Testament, animals were sacrificed to pay the price for our sins. They key to understanding what Jesus did for us lies in understanding why knifing animals would pay for our sins. The wages of sin is death. To pay the price for our sins, something had to die in our place. In the Old Testament, it was an animal without blemish. In the New Testament, it was Jesus, who was without sin.
So Jesus had to die as a sacrifice for us, so that we could be right with God. Furthermore, Jesus had to die a gruesome death to represent the depth and ugliness of our sins. What happened after Jesus died doesn't play into what needed to be done - so it wasn't really described in detail. The Bible has a habit of not fully explaining non-essentials. The answer to what happened to Jesus after He died is either, "we don't need to know" or He just died.
In the end, we really don't know what our souls are made up of - and it doesn't matter to the gospel. What is important is that we figure out what we can't know, stop making things up to cover for it, and stop excluding people who don't view non-essentials in the same way we do.
- The final question is why did Jesus rise? I think the answer is that we all rise and are judged. Jesus is perfect and is judged so. The rest of us are judged and would reap the second death, except that Jesus paid the price already by being a sacrifice for us. For those of us who desire to, we can now receive the judgement that Jesus alone deserved - Life.
This is as far as I understand. I still don't quite understand why Jesus doesn't have to reap the second death, which would be our judgement. If I ever find and/or understand the answer to that, I will add it here.
---complete
Note: I welcome all people who disagree with any aspect of what I concluded. But, before you do, please go to the article I wrote (at http://soulguardian.info/bible/Bible%20Study/JesusDeathVerses.txt) and look at the verses that support your point. Look at how I address them. If I didn't address your point(s), I will add to the article and address them.
DeleteBruce,
DeleteI applaud you for putting this together. There is a ton of great info there and I really think this is a great resource for anyone seriously wanting to check their beliefs against scripture. I think many would be surprised to see how what is often ascribed to the Bible really came from Plato and is being read back into scripture.
Well done Bruce.
I had to add this final article before getting to the big article. It talks about dualism and gives another perspective on this topic. http://www.splitframeofreference.com/blog/2016/10/1/to-be-with-christ-the-intermediate-state-and-phil-121-24 says:
ReplyDeleteIn many theological circles, the doctrine of the intermediate state is often a key theological locus. For many or most evangelical Christians, the intermediate state is a comfort, drawn upon inferences from key Scriptural texts.
my twofold goal is to challenge Christians to stay true to the text, and to show why I think Philippians 1:21-24 is insufficient as support for the doctrine of the intermediate state.
Phil. 1:21-24: ἐμοὶ γὰρ τὸ . . .
My translation: “For me, to live—Christ; and to die—profit. But if to live in the body, this to me is fruitful work, and what I choose to take up I do not know. I am confined by the two, having the desire to die and be with Christ, for rather this is nobler. And to stay in the body is more important for you.”
The article on Desiring God was written by Matt Perman and may be accessed here (http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/what-do-you-believe-about-the-intermediate-state). John Piper is a prominent neo-fundamentalist pastor, and I suspect his website is influential for those interested in this topic.
Perman writes:
First, Paul spoke of having the desire "to depart and be with Christ, for that is very much better" (Philippians 1:23). Notice first of all that Paul speaks of death as a departure (from the body) not into temporary nothingness or unconsciousness but to be with Christ. If we are with Christ once we have died, then we continue existing.
I think Perman makes several leaps in logic here. First of all, the infinitive ἀναλῦσαι (“to depart”) here just means, “to die.” It’s a metaphor meaning ‘death.’ Paul is likely writing from prison here, and the threat of death immanent. He has death on the mind, so to speak. For Perman to assert, “If we are with Christ once we have died, then we continue existing” seems to go beyond the text. There are questions Paul does not answer that Perman seems to presume an answer for. For instance:
Does Paul believe in an immortal soul that can survive bodily death? Unlikely.
Does Paul believe in the resurrection of the body? Yes. Cf. 1 Cor. 15. Why then the need for an intermediate state?
To be with Christ is a relational term, and Christ is already raised in Paul’s mind. In other texts, Paul talks about the immediacy of the resurrection (cf. 1 Cor. 15:51-52), but this begs a question: perspectivally, did Paul believe he would be literally raised in an instant? Unlikely. More likely, he would remain dead until resurrection (that’s why it is called resurrection), but for him, time is but a “twinkling of an eye.” To die with Christ, then is both relational and soteriological.
The preposition σύν (“with”) occurs in conjunction with Christ elsewhere in Paul (Rom. 6:8 and in Col. 2:20 and 3:3-4). In Rom. 6:8, it refers to the death of the person with Christ (soteriology) and her resurrection. The death of the believer means she has participated in Christ’s life, and her resurrection is secured because of his resurrection. In Col. 2:20, ἀπεθάνετε σὺν Χριστῷ (“dying with Christ”) is also a relational term, as in being bound to Christ in death as opposed to the “elements of the world.” In 3:3-4, the life of the believer is “hidden” (κέκρυπται) with Christ and in God (σὺν τῷ Χριστῷ ἐν τῷ θεῷ). Col. 3:4 sums this up quite powerfully:
http://www.splitframeofreference.com/blog/2016/10/1/to-be-with-christ-the-intermediate-state-and-phil-121-24 continued:
ReplyDeleteCol. 3:4: ὅταν ὁ Χριστὸς φανερωθῇ, ἡ ζωὴ ὑμῶν, τότε καὶ ὑμεῖς σὺν αὐτῷ φανερωθήσεσθε ἐν δόξῃ.
My translation: “whenever Christ [the Messiah] may be manifest in our lives, then also you will be manifested in glory with him.”
Paul’s basic premise is sound: to die with Christ is to participate in his life and example, in imitating the dying Messiah so that we may have eternal life in his name. For Perman to make it about continuing to exist seems to contradict the witness of Paul elsewhere, and here especially.
He writes:
Second, notice that Paul speaks of this state as "very much better" than the present state. It would be hard to say such a thing of a state of complete unconsciousness.”
This seems tenuous. Eternal life, in resurrection, is surely preferable to death. The intimacy of Christ, the fullness of his life, and the vindication of Paul’s witness remain forlorn and forsaken without resurrection. To remain dead in light of his own life and sufferings, Paul undoubtedly thought resurrection with Christ was better! To be raised is vindication (cf. Dan. 12:2-3), not abandonment.
Particularly when we consider that Paul's passion was to know Christ, it would seem that the reason the state beyond death is better than this present life is because we are with Christ and know it. If we were suddenly unconscious at death until the resurrection, wouldn't it be better to remain in this life because at least then we would have conscious fellowship with Christ?
He writes:
…notice again that [Paul] speaks of this state as his preference, which indicates (as in Philippians 1:23) that we not only continue existing between death and the resurrection, but that we are aware of our existence.
Nowhere in Paul do we have any language about “existing” between death and resurrection. As has been shown already, this looks to be a fallacious line of argumentation. Of course, resurrection is Paul’s preference! He lived and suffering and ultimately died for Christ. “Awareness” seems more like a modernistic ideal than a New Testament reality.
In essence, Paul in Philippians 1:21-24 is speaking relationally, with an eye toward future resurrection (c.f. 3:10-11). The language about being “in the body” is likely an idiomatic phrase about being alive. For instance, Rom. 8:3 uses a similar syntactical phrase κατέκρινε τὴν ἁμαρτίαν ἐν τῇ σαρκί (“condemned sin in the body”), that is, Jesus’ living mortal body being crucified and killed, and thus condemning sin. Elsewhere, 2 Cor. 4:11b reads as follows:
2 Cor. 4:11: ἵνα καὶ ἡ ζωὴ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ φανερωθῇ ἐν τῇ θνητῇ σαρκὶ ἡμῶν
My translation: “so that also the life of Jesus should be manifested in our mortal bodies.”
The idea of “in the flesh/body” is not to promote a dualistic and tripartite view of the human person (that we are composed of body, soul and/or spirit). Rather, the relational idiom denotes the idea of being alive (or formerly alive). “In the body” is an idiomatic way of simply stating the obvious: you are alive, in the most basic sense of the phrase.
Paul’s language here is about participation in God’s mission in the world, not about a conscious intermediate state. If one desires to argue for such a concept, one is on far better ground in the realm of philosophy and theology rather than this text. I am mildly open to the concept of an intermediate state on philosophical grounds (although I do find it to be unnecessary and not in harmony with the witness of the New Testament), but I cannot endorse such an idea from this chief proof text.