Did Jesus go to Hell?

[Jac3510]

No one has seen the face of God? Hmm . . . I guess the Bible got it wrong, then.

• "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty." Then one of the seraphs flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. (Isaiah 6:4-6)

Anyway, that's something of a tangent. Regarding Sheol, it doesn't do any good to simply assert the the abode of the dead is the grave. I've already pointed out that there is a word for grave: qeber. You've also not taken into account the translation of hades for sheol, so while I appreciate your arguments, they are just bald assertions that run counter to the evidence.

[jenna]

Does the bible not plainly state that "no one can see the face of God and live"? There are also several verses that plainly state the dead know nothing,

[Byblos]

Note, Byblos, that WE are not the ones who are "moving" the comma around. This was actually done by men who wanted to inject their belief of "hell". If you truly want to understand the meaning of such verses, it is best to read several different versions and compare them, and notes that may be in the margins.

I will quote Jac's response on the same subject from another thread (here). Jac, I hope you don't mind.

Just an fyi on this.. The original Greek did not have punctuation marks as we do today.

Yes sir, I am aware. That's why I pointed to Mark's reference. If you want to be technical, the Greek behind the phrase, "Truly, truly, I say to you" (or however you want to translate it) is:

Amen, lego soi

That phrase occurs over and over and over again by Jesus in all the gospels. He only adds the word "today" two times in all of Scripture: once in Mark 14, and one in Luke 23. In Mark 14, the addition of "today" is clearly part of the following clause. The construction in Greek, when speaking to the thief on the cross, is exactly the same.

If I can use a silly illustration to make my point:

J. Vernon McGee has a silly little speech tick where, when he moves to make an application of a passage, he almost always uses the phrase, "Now may I say you you . . ." He invariably uses the phrase. Now, suppose he said the following:

"Now may I say to you today you should forgive that man who offended you!"

How would you hear him? Is he saying on this day to you that you should forgive him at some point, or is he saying that you should forgive him today? Well, since he ALWAYS uses the phrase WITHOUT "today," it is aburd to think that the addition here is superfluous. This is further obvious in Greek in that word position has to do with emphasis rather than meaning. The word "today" as used by Jesus in both Mark and Luke comes at the beginning of the direct discourse, placing it in the emphatic position. It should be, then, translated:

"Truly, truly, I say to you, this very day you will be with Me in paradise."

It isn't a punctuation issue. It's an emphasis issue. Now, is it grammatically POSSIBLE what Jen and others are saying? Of course, but from a grammatical, contextual, and linguistic perspective, it is really is rather absurd. It makes a total mockery of the idea of emphasis, as well as Jesus' repeated usage of the phrase in all of Scripture.

God bless

As for the different bible translations of Luke 23:42, let's take a look:

43Jesus answered him, "I tell you the truth, today you will be with me in paradise."

No footnotes.

43And He said to him, "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in (A)Paradise."

No footnotes.

43And He answered him, Truly I tell you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise.

No footnote.

43 And Jesus replied, “I assure you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

No footnote.

43And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.

No footnote.

43And he said to him, "Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in(A) Paradise."

No footnote on the word 'today'.

Of course there's more but this should do.

P.S. Which bible translation do you use Jen that shows the comma after the word 'today', not before?

[jenna]

Actually, I have a NKJV, where the comma is in the same place as the others, but my margin says that the comma was inserted by man. It says that He promised the thief eternal life, but He did not say the thief would actually receive it ON THAT DAY.

[Jac3510]

I will quote Jac's response on the same subject from another thread (here). Jac, I hope you don't mind.

I don't mind at all, sir. We're bound to quote each other when the same discussion is going on in multiple threads, eh?

Does the bible not plainly state that "no one can see the face of God and live"? There are also several verses that plainly state the dead know nothing,

No, contrary to popular belief, it doesn't. That's an unnecessary conclusion drawn from Ex 33. What people forget is that Moses didn't ask to see God's face. He asked to see God's glory, which is a different matter. The discussion was, then, about seeing the glory of God (which is the context in which "face" is used there). In fact, the word "face" here is interesting:

• Panim: "Face." This particular word always occurs in the plural, perhaps indicitave of the fact that the face is a combination of a number of features. As we shall see below, the face identifies the person and reflects the attitude and sentiments of the person. As such, panim can be a substitute for the self or the feelings of the self. (TWOT)

For a couple of interesting cross references on how this word is used, see Ps 4:6 and Jer 3:12.

At the same time, let's consider Deut 5:24

• And you said, 'Behold, the LORD our God has shown us his glory and greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire. This day we have seen God speak with man, and man still live.

We can look at verses like this forever. As far as your comment about the dead not knowing anything, I would recomment you read the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia's article on the subject. Here is an except you might find helpful:

• Yet it would be a mistake to infer, because of these strong and sometimes poetically heightened contrasts to the world of the living, that Sheol was conceived of as absolutely a place without consciousness, or some dim remembrance of the world above. This is not the case. Necromancy rested on the idea that there was some communication between the world above and the world below (Deuteronomy 18:11); a Samuel could be summoned from the dead (1 Samuel 28:11-15); Sheol from beneath was stirred at the descent of the king of Babylon (Isaiah 14:9). The state is rather that of slumbrous semi-consciousness and enfeebled existence from which in a partial way the spirit might temporarily be aroused. Such conceptions, it need hardly be said, did not rest on revelation, but were rather the natural ideas formed of the future state, in contrast with life in the body, in the absence of revelation.

God bless

[Byblos]

Actually, I have a NKJV, where the comma is in the same place as the others, but my margin says that the comma was inserted by man. It says that He promised the thief eternal life, but He did not say the thief would actually receive it ON THAT DAY.

43 And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

No footnote.

Here's the link.

[jenna]

Slumbrous semi-consciousness and enfeebled existence? Sorry, don't get this part. I prefer for the bible to speak for itself. Ecc.9:5 "For the living know that they shall die, but the dead know NOTHING". This certainly doesn't jive with an "enfeebled existence".

[jenna]

Actually, I have a NKJV, where the comma is in the same place as the others, but my margin says that the comma was inserted by man. It says that He promised the thief eternal life, but He did not say the thief would actually receive it ON THAT DAY.

43 And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

No footnote.

Here's the link.

That's definitely not what my bible says....

[frankbaginski]

Just a couple of things. In talking about the dead. You can be dead in the flesh or dead in the spirit. Those that are dead in the spirit know nothing. When Jesus was asked by a potential new follower that he needed to bury his father, Jesus said let the dead bury the dead. This was clear that the dead in spirit is what He was talking about. If the new follower followed Christ then he would not be dead in spirit. The other issue about seeing the face of God. We know from scripture that several people have seen the face of God. But they did it in the spirit. Now many more saw the face of Christ but he was in the flesh. It is confusing but if you separate the flesh from the spirit it seems to work out just fine.

[johnt]

The Scriptures clearly state that when Jesus was first encountered after He rose from the dead He was not recognized by those who meet Him until He told them who He was. Could this have been the "Face of G-d" that they had seen before being told that it was Him? As far as going into the bowles of the earth or "Hades" He had gone there to retrieve the first of His first fruits (souls) of salvation to present them to the Father after His death and prior to His ascention. From what I have studied a lot of confusion boils down to the translations from Greek to other languages.




http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/did- ... ll-faq.htm

From the above link in brief form;

Did Jesus Go to Hell?


The short answer to this question is: "No." The biblical authors were more accurate in their use of words than some of our Bible translators or creed writers. There are two Greek words for the abode of the dead. (Greek is the language in which the New Testament of the Bible was originally written.) Hell (Geenna in Greek, also called the lake of fire and the eternal fire) was made for the Devil and his minions (Matthew 25:41) and will be occupied by all the unrighteous after the last judgement (Revelation 19:20-21 and 20:10-15). There is no biblical evidence that anyone has gone there or will go there until after Jesus' Second Coming (Revelation 19:11-16). This includes Jesus Himself.

The other Greek word is Hadas (from which we get the English word Hades). This is the region of the dead. Before Jesus' ascension, the spirits of all people went to Hades. After His ascension, only the spirits of unbelievers go to Hades, while the spirits of believers go directly to be with the Lord (2 Corinthians 5:1-8). It is into this region that Jesus entered after His crucifixion (Acts 2:25-31 in which Peter quotes from Psalm 16:9-10). Ephesians 4:8-10 says that Jesus, "had descended into the lower parts of the earth." This may also speak of Jesus' visit to Hades before His ascension. Finally, Romans 10:7 refers to Jesus in "the abyss" while He was among the dead. After the final judgment, Hades will be cast into Hell (Revelation 20:14). Therefore, the longer answer is: "Yes, Jesus descended into Hades but not into Hell."

[jenna]

No one has seen the face of God? Hmm . . . I guess the Bible got it wrong, then.

• "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty." Then one of the seraphs flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. (Isaiah 6:4-6)

Anyway, that's something of a tangent. Regarding Sheol, it doesn't do any good to simply assert the the abode of the dead is the grave. I've already pointed out that there is a word for grave: qeber. You've also not taken into account the translation of hades for sheol, so while I appreciate your arguments, they are just bald assertions that run counter to the evidence.

This may be stirring the pot a little, but I did find a verse you may want to read. It is 1John 4:12.

[Byblos]

No one has seen the face of God? Hmm . . . I guess the Bible got it wrong, then.

• "Woe to me!" I cried. "I am ruined! For I am a man of unclean lips, and I live among a people of unclean lips, and my eyes have seen the King, the LORD Almighty." Then one of the seraphs flew to me with a live coal in his hand, which he had taken with tongs from the altar. (Isaiah 6:4-6)

Anyway, that's something of a tangent. Regarding Sheol, it doesn't do any good to simply assert the the abode of the dead is the grave. I've already pointed out that there is a word for grave: qeber. You've also not taken into account the translation of hades for sheol, so while I appreciate your arguments, they are just bald assertions that run counter to the evidence.

This may be stirring the pot a little, but I did find a verse you may want to read. It is 1John 4:12.

No one has ever seen God; but if we love one another, God lives in us and his love is made complete in us.

contrast that with

No one has ever seen God, but God the One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him known.

What does that tell you Jen?

[jenna]

To clarify that point, Byblos, I must take a little trip back to the O.T. First, though, in John 1:1-3, it says that "the Word (Jesus) created all things". The actual God of the O.T. was Jesus, or God the Son. No one ever knew that God the FATHER existed until the N.T. Jesus made the Father known to those in the New Testament! One reason He came was so that we may also know God the Father. (looking for the verse now).

[oscarsiziba]

Jesus and all the Godhead take death as but a sleep ,so to say Jesus 'walked in his death',so as to preach to the dead is contra-Scripture.Psalm 146 v4-6 shows that even the senses and every faculty of the body ceases any operation at death and therefore to think that He preached to the dead in His death would not be Scriptural in literal sense,BUT only if meaning that the death of Christ was a sermon(proclamation)of God's love to those that were 'dead' in sin.The Bible clearly shows that Jesus never went anywhere in His death.If He went,could it be that those garments found in His tomb on resurrection Sunday had been left on Friday as He rushed to deliver an evening sermon?
John 5 v 25-29 shows that the dead are in their graves and can only come to life at the second coming of Christ which is likened by Matthew to the flashing of lightning in chapter 24 v 27 and reaffirmed by Rev 1v 7 which also points to Christ's coming as universal and visible,audible and a joyful experience for those that are saved and on the opposite a sad one for the lost.The same cannot be said of the mood of people when one of us is snatched away at death.There is no joy for any ,but sorrow.By the way when Christ ascended and promised to come back he said ,'.....I will come again and receive you unto myself....'Note here that Jesus did not say you shall follow me(by way of death)into heaven,but said He would come for us and the coming thereof has many signs ,with just a few to be fulfilled.Where then can we say our departed friends are if Jesus' coming indicators are not yet fulfilled? Can we safely declare as we bury underground our friends that they are ascended into heaven and are in Abraham's bosom.If we allude to this doctrine,then we may as well not need to shed tears at funerals,but seek that we die quickly and join them in the bliss that Lazarus was said to be enjoying.
My conclusion is death is just that-death and Jesus and even any of the people(holy or evil) don't get to their eternal destinations upon their death,but their destinies would have been eternally fixed.

[Byblos]

Jesus and all the Godhead take death as but a sleep ,so to say Jesus 'walked in his death',so as to preach to the dead is contra-Scripture.Psalm 146 v4-6 shows that even the senses and every faculty of the body ceases any operation at death and therefore to think that He preached to the dead in His death would not be Scriptural in literal sense,BUT only if meaning that the death of Christ was a sermon(proclamation)of God's love to those that were 'dead' in sin.The Bible clearly shows that Jesus never went anywhere in His death.If He went,could it be that those garments found in His tomb on resurrection Sunday had been left on Friday as He rushed to deliver an evening sermon?
John 5 v 25-29 shows that the dead are in their graves and can only come to life at the second coming of Christ which is likened by Matthew to the flashing of lightning in chapter 24 v 27 and reaffirmed by Rev 1v 7 which also points to Christ's coming as universal and visible,audible and a joyful experience for those that are saved and on the opposite a sad one for the lost.The same cannot be said of the mood of people when one of us is snatched away at death.There is no joy for any ,but sorrow.By the way when Christ ascended and promised to come back he said ,'.....I will come again and receive you unto myself....'Note here that Jesus did not say you shall follow me(by way of death)into heaven,but said He would come for us and the coming thereof has many signs ,with just a few to be fulfilled.Where then can we say our departed friends are if Jesus' coming indicators are not yet fulfilled? Can we safely declare as we bury underground our friends that they are ascended into heaven and are in Abraham's bosom.If we allude to this doctrine,then we may as well not need to shed tears at funerals,but seek that we die quickly and join them in the bliss that Lazarus was said to be enjoying.
My conclusion is death is just that-death and Jesus and even any of the people(holy or evil) don't get to their eternal destinations upon their death,but their destinies would have been eternally fixed.

This is the classic position of the belief that does not separate the physical from the non-physical (whatever that may be). Christadelphians and I believe JWs follow this theology. There's plenty of scriptural evidence to the contrary, however. God is the God of the living, not of the dead. Christ by his resurrection concurred death. It no longer has any dominion over believers as we are re-born in Him, heirs to eternal life (but we still physically die, don't we?).