Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by robert j »

In the NT books in which a descent by Jesus Christ into the underworld on a redemptive mission is found --- why did those authors choose to include it?

Short answer, I think those authors derived the concept from their source materials --- in the Jewish scriptures in the Old Greek.

The terms “hell” and “hades” and "sheol" and all the other various Hebrew, Greek and English terms used for such a realm present a complex of connotations for which books have been written. My discussion here is intended to encompass a very wide representation of that underworld realm.

I’ll begin with 1 Peter because verses 3:18-19 are often the centerpiece for discussions of such a descent by the risen spirit of Jesus Christ.

The Book of Isaiah was central to the development of early Christian thought. The author of 1 Peter included 7 direct citations and at least 4 clear allusions from Isaiah. The author of 1 Peter used Isaiah as source material and as a “witness” to Jesus Christ, examples ---

As a chosen and precious cornerstone lain in Zion (1 Peter 2:6 and Isaiah 28:16)
As a stumbling stone and rock of offence (1 Peter 2:8 and Isaiah 8:14)
He committed no sin and no deceit was found in his mouth (1 Peter 2:22 and Isaiah 53:9)
He bore our sins (1 Peter 2:24 and Isaiah 53:4)
By his stripes you are healed (1 Peter 2:24 and Isaiah 53:5)

And the passage often used to demonstrate a descent into the realm of the dead ---

1 Peter Isaiah (LXX)

Because Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, so that He might bring you to God, having been put to death indeed in the flesh, but having been made alive in the spirit, in which also having gone, He preached to the spirits in prison (φυλακῇ). (1 Peter 3:18-19)


For to this end the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that they might be judged indeed according to men in the flesh, but they might live in the spirit according to God. (1 Peter 4:6)

I gave you for a covenant of a race, for a light of nations; to open the eyes of the blind, to lead out of bonds ones being tied; from out of the house of prison (φυλακής) and ones sitting in darkness. (Isaiah 42:6-7)


Spirit of the LORD is upon me, because he anointed me to announce good news to the poor. He has sent me to heal the ones being broken in the heart; to proclaim a release to captives and recovery of sight to the blind. (Isaiah 61:1)



I think these passages in 1 Peter are an expansion of this passage in Ephesians, which was derived from Psalms ---

EphesiansPsalms (LXX)

Therefore it says: "Having ascended on high, He led captive captivity, and gave gifts to men." Now what is "He ascended," except that He also descended into the lower regions of the earth? The One having descended is also the same one having ascended above all the heavens, so that He might fulfill all things. (Ephesians 4:8-10)

You ascended the height; you captured captivity; you received gifts by men … Blessed be the LORD day by day, for you greatly prospered us, O God of our deliverances … even the LORD delivering the ones at the outer reaches of death. (Psalm 68:18-20, note 67:19-21 in some versions)


All the elements were there in the Jewish scriptures for the creative hands and creative minds of the early Christian writers who found such an event useful in their works.

So why did Jesus Christ descend into the underworld on a redemptive mission? Because the source materials said he did.


robert j
Last edited by robert j on Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:42 pm, edited 4 times in total.
User avatar
DCHindley
Posts: 3401
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2013 9:53 am
Location: Ohio, USA

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by DCHindley »

That is a good question. I cannot offer my uniquely wrong POV as I have not developed one (yet).

I would think that as early christians went looking for proof texts for their brand of "peshers" to explain just how Jesus came to die and what that meant for the end-age, they came upon these other, previously overlooked passages, clearly "connected" by key-words to the ones they had already found, and the high Christology where Jesus becomes a divine redeemer received a new modification.

This probably dates the development of the doctrine to after the gospels, but I seem to recall there being possible cryptic allusions to such as doctrine in the gospels. If so, then the doctrine of preaching to the dead in the grave, as we find it in creeds, may not have yet come into sharp focus.

If there is anything to the heresiologists charge that Marcion had adopted the cosmology of one Cerdo (probably a foil anyways), this may have a connection to it (probably as a reaction, not some idea born from Marcion's noggin).

Actually, now that I look back at your OP, you do call attention to those cryptic passages.
Therefore it says: "Having ascended on high, He led captive captivity, and gave gifts to men." Now what is "He ascended," except that He also descended into the lower regions of the earth? The One having descended is also the same one having ascended above all the heavens, so that He might fulfill all things. (Ephesians 4:8-10)
But we don't know for sure what kind of cosmology the author of that passage in Ephesians had assumed. In Plato, for instance, the "world" contained all the elements on varying grades, from the finest of fine where the air was never heavy with humidity but always light and aerie (ether) and the minerals, plants animals and even rocks are pure and fine, and as you descend into the depth of matter, you exit the heavens and end up in the dregs at the bottom, the earth we know.

The "lower parts" of the earth would probably refer then to the grave or caves where bodies were interred.

The message could merely be that the Christ will in time resurrect everybody who had previously died, so as not to leave the blessed age for only those alive at the time it comes.

DCH
Stuart
Posts: 878
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 12:24 am
Location: Sunnyvale, CA

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by Stuart »

According to Marcionite and Gnostic opinion yes it was to redeem or free captives held in Hades. I will give my understanding from their perspective as a starting point.

Note: Hebrew myth it's She'ol, which has almost all the same features as Hades, and as the NT based on LXX which used Hades; Matthew seems to make a distinction with Gehanna, and so did Marcion/Luke 12:5 discussed below.

Hades is not "hell" as we think of it, but the mythological land of the dead in Greek culture, overseen by the a God Hades who became associated with the land and which took on his name. In Gnostic/Marcionite view Satan or the devil rules, having been cast down. But as it is part of the physical world, it is ruled by the Creator God or Demiurge, who is also the Jewish God and Law giver (to Moses). In some of the theological systems the Creator and Satan are one and the same, in others Satan is a separate entity -- some an angel cast down by the Creator (not the high God). Note in some Gnostic views the great angel cast down by God was the Creator or Jewish God YHWH. The Catholic view, which we inherit and are brought up with the cast out angel was Satan and the Creator is the same as the High God over all, not a lower angel. But as you can see the details of Hades (NT reflecting LXX where Hades replaced She'ol) is pretty much the same in all views, just differing in who runs the show, and their relationship to the High God.

Anyway, heaven is in the sky, or above the sky. This is consistent across both Marcionite/Gnostic and Catholic views (until relatively recently, in the big picture of things, when Heaven and hell become sort of vague location-less states of the dead -- we know more about the inner earth and outer space and the universe, so we have modified our view of the where the dead go to not conflict with that reality ... unless you are Mormon I guess).

But many Christians, especially those who rejected the OT and the God of the OT, such as the Gnostics and Marcionites did, had a problem (much like Mormons today) in that their deceased relatives never heard the word ("doctrine" IMO would be a better translation) of Christ and so cannot be lifted into heaven, as they were not counted among the faithful and in fact had no opportunity to be so. As a result, Jesus --in a sort of Santa Claus miracle of timelessness where he can cover infinite number of households in a blink of the eye-- visited Hades to free the dead from their bindings (of Moses and the OT) and those worthy lifted to heaven above the sky to be with God in the light (Pleroma) with the true God and Christ.

In the Apellean sect (generally reputed to be derivative of the Marcionite), we are informed that the righteous Jewish descendants of Abraham are not saved, as they believe Moses and cling to him rather hear Jesus, as did the prophets. This view seems to have been somewhat widespread among the Gnostic type Christians (John 8:12-59 reads with this POV.) However the reporting of Apelles and others holding this view included Abraham among those not saved, but the NT text does not support this inclusion of Abraham with the followers of Moses; instead Abraham is presented as the father of both Jewish and Gentile descendants, the last common branch point (i.e., his two children), but like the Muslim account the free child is gentile, the slave Jewish. (Note, the Marcionite version of Galatians chapter 4 reads with this view of the free child being gentile, the Catholic version we have reads in agreement with the OT, the free child being Jewish).

We see hints of this theology in Luke 16:19-29 (verses 30-31 are post-Marcionite, a harmonizing of the OT with the NT, so that knowing Moses is equal to knowing Jesus, a view which the prior 11 verses do not support). This view is tied into the baptism of the dead, which was practiced by the Marcionites, much like Mormons today. This baptism of the dead reflected in chapter 15 of 1 Corinthians.

Summary, in the Gnostic/Marcionite view, Jesus did descend from the cross into Hades to redeem/save the dead with his doctrine (word). This descent was not dispute by the proto-Orthodox, merely the argument for who was the caretaker of Hades and who were those he saved. We see this in the Catholic view reflected in Matthew 27:52-53, where the descend is presumed but depicts a bodily resurrection rather than simply spiritual.

********************

Matthew, which is fully from the pro-Torah or proto-Orthodox wing of the nascent church has references instead to Gehenna (a small valley near Jerusalem) as Hell. Luke (Marcion) 12:5 has one reference about the one who can cast into Gehenna. The parallel Matthew 10:28 adds that the "body and soul" can be cast there and "destroyed" -- a reference with the bodily resurrection, making it permanent denial for some. She'ol possibly is understood by Matthew as separate from Hades or perhaps the division within Hades (per the Jewish version of She'ol separating the righteous and the evil in different areas betwixt "a great chasm has been fixed" per Luke 16:26), and perhaps that is what the casting into the outer darkness refers (e.g., Matthew 8:12, 22:13, 25:30, also 2 Peter 2:17, Jude 13).

All the analysis and reports from the Church fathers are of course backward projecting on the writers. But that said, pretty much all sects of Christianity had Jesus visit the dead and free those held captive who had not heard his word while alive. In Matthew it was done once, and the Catholic editor added Luke 16:30-31 to the Lazarus story make it clear even those of old were saved already because they heard Moses; thus the dead were saved already in the one act. But in the Marcionite view (much like Mormons today) the act of visiting the dead is ever ongoing, and the dead need to be brought into the faith via baptism on their behalf.

************************

While I like your list - very good compilation-, I have to be a little bit skeptical of how much actually applied to the NT writers. The practice of Scholasticism deeply colors our interpretation and exegesis of NT verses with respect to the OT. Many of the parallels are probably accidental, and only applied after the fact by exegetes. I suggest from the 3rd century onward when Platonic logic entered. And in the late middle ages when most of the church father manuscripts we have today were rewritten during the age of scholasticism as tools to fight the Cathars (Καθαροί or 'pure ones') and Bogomils (Slavic 'Friends of God'). Our modern view is heavily influenced by that technique, which has changed hardly at all over the last 1000 years in Christian studies. It is a construction for analysis to find harmony even where there is contradiction, which tends to yield many false positives.

After all descending into the land of the dead (Hades) to rescue those unjustly held could have been inspired by the story of Orpheus and Eurydice, which has nothing to do with the OT.

All the above is not a rigorous analysis, just a brief summary of my observations on the subject.
Last edited by Stuart on Sun Aug 12, 2018 7:50 pm, edited 3 times in total.
“’That was excellently observed’, say I, when I read a passage in an author, where his opinion agrees with mine. When we differ, there I pronounce him to be mistaken.” - Jonathan Swift
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

Stuart wrote: Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:40 pmWhile I like your list - very good compilation-, I have to be a little bit skeptical of how much actually applied to the NT writers. The practice of Scholasticism deeply colors our interpretation and exegesis of NT verses with respect to the OT. Many of the parallels are probably accidental, and only applied after the fact by exegetes. I suggest from the 3rd century onward when Platonic logic entered. And in the late middle ages when most of the church father manuscripts we have today were rewritten during the age of scholasticism as tools to fight the Cathars (Καθαροί or 'pure ones') and Bogomils (Slavic 'Friends of God'). Our modern view is heavily influenced by that technique, which has changed hardly at all over the last 1000 years in Christian studies. It is a construction for analysis to find harmony even where there is contradiction, which tends to yield many false positives.

After all descending into the land of the dead (Hades) to rescue those unjustly held could have been inspired by the story of Orpheus and Eurydice, which has nothing to do with the OT.
My reaction to the OP is similar. It is not that it is wrong; but it does seem incomplete. For the Christian authors to fabricate a descent to Hades completely from scratch on the basis of a few scraps of scripture, mutually interpreted, seems less likely than that they were following a script which was already in place, which may be why Jesus' descent resembles other descents. It seems far easier for some of those scriptures to inspire the story when such a template is already in place and culturally available.

ETA: I would compare this situation to that of the Eucharist. It is possible to tease the bread and the wine out of scripture, as is done in 1 Corinthians 10, for example, but no one will wish to deny that the idea of a symbolic meal of bread and wine was already culturally available. I wager that the ritual meal itself preceded the exegesis from the scriptures which was later used to justify it. In the same way, it seems possible that the despoliation of Hades came first, based on cultural precedents, and was then justified by the scriptures.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
Charles Wilson
Posts: 2093
Joined: Thu Apr 03, 2014 8:13 am

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by Charles Wilson »

Genesis 3: 19 (RSV):

[19] In the sweat of your face
you shall eat bread
till you return to the ground,
for out of it you were taken;
you are dust,
and to dust you shall return."

Ecclesiastes 9: 4-7 (RSV):

[4] But he who is joined with all the living has hope, for a living dog is better than a dead lion.
[5] For the living know that they will die, but the dead know nothing, and they have no more reward; but the memory of them is lost.
[6] Their love and their hate and their envy have already perished, and they have no more for ever any share in all that is done under the sun.
[7] Go, eat your bread with enjoyment, and drink your wine with a merry heart; for God has already approved what you do.

The argument posed by a "Descent into Hell" shows the NT Framework was written for other Cultures. You can minimize these verses if you wish but you must show that the greater Israelite Culture also accepted the refutation of "...you are dust...". This ranks with Monotheism allowing many gods.

There is no Book of Plato in any Bible I've found...
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by iskander »

robert j wrote: Fri Aug 03, 2018 9:16 am In the NT books in which a descent by Jesus Christ into the underworld on a redemptive mission is found, or an allusion to such an event --- why did those authors choose to include it?...
Probably because they were Judeans.

Mas. Berachoth 28b
When Rabban Johanan ben Zakkai fell ill, his disciples went in to visit him. When he saw them he began to weep. His disciples said to him: Lamp of Israel, pillar of the right hand,8 mighty hammer!

Wherefore weepest thou?

He replied: If I were being taken today before a human king who is here today and tomorrow in the grave, whose anger if he is angry with me does not last forever, who if he imprisons me does not imprison me forever and who if he puts me to death does not put me to everlasting death, and whom I can persuade with words and bribe with money, even so I would weep
robert j
Posts: 1007
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 5:01 pm

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by robert j »

Ben C. Smith wrote: Fri Aug 03, 2018 3:12 pm
My reaction to the OP is similar. It is not that it is wrong; but it does seem incomplete. For the Christian authors to fabricate a descent to Hades completely from scratch on the basis of a few scraps of scripture, mutually interpreted, seems less likely than that they were following a script which was already in place, which may be why Jesus' descent resembles other descents. It seems far easier for some of those scriptures to inspire the story when such a template is already in place and culturally available.
Yes, agreed. Certainly early Christian thought did not develop and evolve in a cultural vacuum. I think your analysis of Ba'al and Môt provides interesting examples. And, at least according to Josephus, the Pharisees had a relevant belief system ---

They also believe that souls have an immortal rigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again; on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people … (Josephus, Ant. 18.1.3)

In my OP, the answer I suggested to the question of why the risen spirit of Jesus Christ descended into the underworld on behalf of the dead was presented only in very general terms --- that is, those NT authors found it useful in their works, and they found the concept in their source materials (the Jewish scriptures). To that I might add that some relevant concepts were not entirely foreign within myths, legends and other religious systems of the times.

But, getting more granular, that leads to the question of why did those NT authors find the concept useful in their works? Why spend the ink and parchment on that topic?

Returning to the relevant passages outlined in the OP ---

The verses in Ephesians provide a bit of illumination. But the purpose of the descent of Jesus into “the lower regions of the earth” only becomes evident when paired with the following verse in Psalms --- it follows almost immediately the verse cited by the author of Ephesians ---

… even the Lord delivering the ones at the outer reaches of death. (Psalm 68:20, aka 67:21)

This leaves 1 Peter, where the concept is presented more clearly. I think 1 Peter is a challenging text for a number of reasons. I don’t want to get sidetracked with a discussion of who might have written the letter and why, except to say that the characterizations of Jesus Christ are somewhat akin to that in the Deutero-Paulines. And the letter is addressed to groups in Asia Minor --- areas associated with Pauline congregations. Hence, I think it is the teachings of Paul that can best reveal why the author of 1 Peter chose to include the verses in question in his letter.

More clearly than in Ephesians, I think 1 Peter 3:18-21 and 4:5-6 addressed a gap in Pauline soteriology.

It seems that Paul, in his initial evangelizing visits, did not adequately address the question of what would happen to those that had died before “He comes” in the near future to sweep believers away into the heavens. Paul found it necessary to address the question in his letters, telling the Thessalonians that believers that had died --- the “dead in Christ” --- would rise first at the Parousia. Paul also provided the same concept in 1 Corinthians. In addition, it seems the Corinthians were conducting baptism for the dead. It’s not entirely clear how enthusiastic Paul was about baptism for the dead --- presumably the act of baptizing a living person in order to provide salvation for ones(s) who had died without the opportunity to accept faith in Jesus Christ.

Those that had died before the "promise" had come, that is, before the long-secret mystery of Jesus Christ had been revealed by Paul, did have the opportunity while alive to follow all the requirements of the Mosaic law as born Jews or as Gentile converts. That temporary means of justification was clearly acknowledged by Paul (Galatians 3:19, 3:24).

However, it was all those uncounted numbers --- those that had died during the vast stretch of time after Adam but before the advent of the Mosaic laws --- that enjoyed the benefit of the redemptive journey into the underworld by the risen Jesus. Without such a redemptive journey, within the realm of Pauline thought, a vast number of spirits would have been abandoned in the prison of the underworld without any opportunity for redemption. I think such a situation would have been considered as unacceptable within a faith system promoting a universalist approach --- redemption for all who might believe.


The risen spirit of Jesus Christ descended into the realm of the dead to proclaim his salvific message and provide all those spirits the opportunity to accept the faith. This, with significant help from the Jewish scriptures, is the solution presented by the author of 1 Peter.

Because Christ also suffered once for sins (for all) … having been put to death indeed in the flesh, but having been made alive in the spirit, in which also having gone, He preached to the spirits in prison (1 Peter 3:18-19) … For to this end the gospel was proclaimed even to the dead, so that they might be judged indeed according to men in the flesh, but they might live in the spirit according to God. (1 Peter 4:6)

Jesus Christ suffered and died on behalf of all --- and now, within the realm of a Pauline system, all those dead and alive over the vast sweep of human existence have enjoyed some opportunity to accept justification in the eyes of the great and ancient God of Israel.
Last edited by robert j on Tue Dec 17, 2019 10:52 pm, edited 15 times in total.
iskander
Posts: 2091
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 12:38 pm

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by iskander »

The Judean world after death
Sins against the spirit cannot be forgiven and those sinners will remain forever in the nether world

Mas. Yoma 87a
Whosoever causes a community to do good, no sin will come through him, and whosoever causes the community to sin, no opportunity will be granted him to become repentant.

Whosoever causes a community to do good, no sin will come through him’. Why? Lest he be in Gehinnom, and his disciples in Gan Eden [Paradise], as it is said: For Thou wilt not abandon my soul to the nether world, neither wilt Thou suffer thy godly one to see the pit.12

‘And whosoever causes the community to sin, no opportunity will be granted him for repentance’, lest he be in Gan Eden and his disciples in Gehinnom, as it is said: A man, that is laden with the blood of any person shall hasten his steps unto the pit; none will help him.13
Giuseppe
Posts: 13658
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 5:37 am
Location: Italy

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by Giuseppe »

DCHindley wrote: Fri Aug 03, 2018 10:57 am
The "lower parts" of the earth would probably refer then to the grave or caves where bodies were interred.
The "lower parts of earth" are probably what Putarch calls "extreme parts of earth" where he places the death of Osiris by Thypo. Julian places there the death of Attis, too. This point raises the question of where precisely are these "lower parts of earth": in the lower heavens? If on the earth, where precisely? Surely not at Golgotha.
Nihil enim in speciem fallacius est quam prava religio. -Liv. xxxix. 16.
John2
Posts: 4298
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Why Did Jesus Descend Into Hell?

Post by John2 »

Robert j cited Josephus regarding the Pharisees and then asked:
"They also believe that souls have an immortal rigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again; on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people … (Josephus, Ant. 18.1.3) " ...

But, getting more granular, that leads to the question of why did those NT authors find the concept useful in their works? --- Why spend the ink and parchment on that topic?
That's a great catch in Josephus, Robert j, and I think the answer could be that this is yet another Pharisaic "notion" that Josephus says Fourth Philosophers shared with the Pharisees (like the resurrection of the dead and messianism and such). It makes sense to me to see the above idea in Christianity too since I view (Jewish) Christianity as being a faction of the Fourth Philosophy. I think we could thus ask the same question of the Pharisees. Why did they find the above concept useful? I couldn't say exactly, but in the big picture I suppose it stemmed from their notions about the resurrection (perhaps based on the OT verses in the charts above) and it flowed from there into the various Fourth Philosophic factions. As Josephus puts it in Ant. 18.1.6 (shortly after the above passage): "But of the fourth sect of Jewish philosophy, Judas the Galilean was the author. These men agree in all other things with the Pharisaic notions."
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply