Jesus preached the Gospel in hell for three days
Jesus preached the Gospel in hell for three days
I have run accross this a few times, but I have never really seen any evidence to support it. Where does the Bible say that Jesus preached the gospel in hell? Was Jesus ever in Hell?
Jesus and the gospel
If Jesus did preach the gospel in hell that would mean that people in hell could be saved. Why would He teach it if it meant nothing? If people in hell can be saved then your place of residence upon death may not be final. Could this mean that those in heaven could face the possibility of still going to hell at a later date? To me it leads to the conclusion that he did NOT teach the gospel in hell.
Ray
Ray
-
SUGAAAAA
- Established Member
- Posts: 224
- Joined: Mon Oct 17, 2005 3:42 pm
- Christian: No
- Location: California
Actually, what is thought is that Jesus went to preach the Gospel to save those who "lived by the faith", but died before they could hear the Gospels, since "No one comes to the Father except through Jesus". If not hell, than something called "Abraham's Bosom", which is thought to be a place of rest for the soul, or paradise. see: Luke 16:22-23
Though Im sure many disagree.
Though Im sure many disagree.
Rice is great if you're really hungry and want to eat two thousand of something.
-
IRQ Conflict
- Senior Member
- Posts: 540
- Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2005 5:01 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: AB. Canada
SUGAAAAA, thats bang on the money. Before Christ died for our sins thier was no way for anyone to be saved, therfore He went and preached the Good News in hades to those who would believe. Prior to the resurection some went to hades and others Abrahms bosom depending on the judgment of God and how one lived his/her life. Look at the story of Lot and the rich man as an example.
Hellfire
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
1Ti 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called:
1Ti 6:21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
-
Canuckster1127
- Old School
- Posts: 5310
- Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 11:31 am
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Theistic Evolution
- Location: Ottawa, ON Canada
http://www.gotquestions.org/did-Jesus-go-to-hell.html
This is one of the better treatises on this subject I was able to find with a quick internet search.
There is good reason to differentiate using the language of hell, the final lake of fire destination for Satan and his fallen angels, verses Hades or Sheol. I think there's a clue in terms of Christ's statement to the thief on the cross that this day he would be with Christ in "paradise" which in other contexts in the Bible seems to be an area of holding waiting for the redemptive completion of Christ's death and resurrection.
It's also the source of the Catholic doctrine of purgatory which Protestants reject as no longer needed or in effect following Christ's finished work on the cross. In fact, the use of indulgences, to use the influence of the church to release souls from purgatory, for fund raising by the Church was one of the catalysts of the Protestant Reformation particularly as its practise affected Martin Luther. The catholic Church addressed that itself later in their own counter-reformation when they began to address some of the issues that brought about the reformation.
The immediate source of the terminology is the apostles creed and it is recognized that of all the statements made in that creed, this one is the hardest to substantiate and understand based on direct Biblical proof-texting.
This is one of the better treatises on this subject I was able to find with a quick internet search.
There is good reason to differentiate using the language of hell, the final lake of fire destination for Satan and his fallen angels, verses Hades or Sheol. I think there's a clue in terms of Christ's statement to the thief on the cross that this day he would be with Christ in "paradise" which in other contexts in the Bible seems to be an area of holding waiting for the redemptive completion of Christ's death and resurrection.
It's also the source of the Catholic doctrine of purgatory which Protestants reject as no longer needed or in effect following Christ's finished work on the cross. In fact, the use of indulgences, to use the influence of the church to release souls from purgatory, for fund raising by the Church was one of the catalysts of the Protestant Reformation particularly as its practise affected Martin Luther. The catholic Church addressed that itself later in their own counter-reformation when they began to address some of the issues that brought about the reformation.
The immediate source of the terminology is the apostles creed and it is recognized that of all the statements made in that creed, this one is the hardest to substantiate and understand based on direct Biblical proof-texting.
-
Jac3510
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 5472
- Joined: Tue Aug 03, 2004 6:53 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
- Location: Fort Smith, AR
- Contact:
I explained my understanding of this passage here. Long story short, I don't think 1 Pet 3 refers to Jesus preaching the Gospel for the salvation of OT saints.
If you believe that OT saints had to believe in the name of Jesus, I think you are going to have a problem with Gen. 15:6. We need to be careful, because OT soteriology is extremely murcky. Further, you can't expect to read the NT back into the OT. Salvation through Jesus is a NT revelation that relates to the Church. If you are a dispensationalist, as I am, you see a difference in the "gospel of the kingdom" and "the gospel of Jesus." Those who are saved by the latter are "in Christ." Now, you may consider OT saints in Christ (although I'm not sure on that), but you can't say that they were made a part of the Church.
So, again, I'd recommend caution on this . . . salvation in the OT seemed to relate to the belief that God would establish His kingdom with His people. Thus, a person trusted Yahweh for their ultimate delivery. So, given all that, I stick to my understanding of the passage in question. Jesus preached to the spirits in prison, that is, the fallen angels, declaring victory.
Just my two cents, I suppose.
If you believe that OT saints had to believe in the name of Jesus, I think you are going to have a problem with Gen. 15:6. We need to be careful, because OT soteriology is extremely murcky. Further, you can't expect to read the NT back into the OT. Salvation through Jesus is a NT revelation that relates to the Church. If you are a dispensationalist, as I am, you see a difference in the "gospel of the kingdom" and "the gospel of Jesus." Those who are saved by the latter are "in Christ." Now, you may consider OT saints in Christ (although I'm not sure on that), but you can't say that they were made a part of the Church.
So, again, I'd recommend caution on this . . . salvation in the OT seemed to relate to the belief that God would establish His kingdom with His people. Thus, a person trusted Yahweh for their ultimate delivery. So, given all that, I stick to my understanding of the passage in question. Jesus preached to the spirits in prison, that is, the fallen angels, declaring victory.
Just my two cents, I suppose.
And that, brothers and sisters, is the kind of foolishness you get people who insist on denying biblical theism. A good illustration of any as the length people will go to avoid acknowledging basic truths.Proinsias wrote:I don't think you are hearing me. Preference for ice cream is a moral issue