Did Christ go to Hell and suffer for three days and three nights after His death on the cross and prior to His resurrection from the dead?
The Greek text of Scripture nowhere
declares that Christ went to Hell. The King James Version may be to blame for
this misconception, for it mistranslates Acts 2:27 to read, “Because thou wilt
not leave my soul in hell, neither
wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption” (emphasis added). The word
“hell” (Acts 2:27, KJV) is actually the Greek word hades.[1] The Scriptures declare that Christ went to
Hades, not Hell.
Hades is the intermediate place of the dead.[2] Prior to the ascension of Christ, Hades
included both the lost and the saved dead, the two groups being separated by a
“great chasm” (Lk. 16:26).[3] Jesus’ account of the rich man and Lazarus in Luke 16:19-31 gives confirmation
to the Jewish idea of two compartments in Hades, distinct from and yet near one
another. On the cross, Jesus referred to Abraham’s bosom as “Paradise”.[4] It is evident that He did not mean Heaven, for Jesus clearly stated in Matthew
12:40 that He was going to be “three days and three nights in the heart of the
earth”.
The Greek word hades is equivalent to the Hebrew term sheol (Acts 2:27; cf. Psa. 16:10). In the Old Testament, sheol is described using various terms
such as “grave” (Gen. 37:35), “pit” (Num. 16:30), and “hell” (Psa. 18:5, KJV).
In the New Testament, hades is
described simply as Hades (the New American Standard Bible often simply
transliterates from the Greek) or (unfortunately) “hell,” as the KJV usually
(10 out of 11 times) translates the term.[5]
But did Christ suffer in Hades? A proponent of the teaching that Christ
suffered in Hades writes:
"The Greek
word soul is also used in Matthew 10:28 and puts a differentiation between
physical life on earth and the soul referring that the soul will be destroyed
in Hades."
But the word "Hades" does not appear in Matthew 10:28. (In
Matthew 10:28, Jesus says, "Do not fear those who kill the body but are
unable to kill the soul; but rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul
and body in hell.") Even in the original Greek language of the New Testament, the word hades
does not appear in Matthew 10:28. The Greek word that actually appears in
Matthew 10:28 is geenna and the New
American Standard Bible correctly uses the English word “hell” to translate it.
Hades and geenna (hell) are not interchangeable – they are two different Greek words distinguishing different places, each having unique characteristics. The Greek word geenna, from which we
get the English word Gehenna, is the eternal place of the damned and has only one compartment.[6] In contrast, Hades has two compartments as Luke chapter 16 explains. One of the compartments is used as a temporary holding tank for the wicked dead (Rev. 20:13-14).
The other compartment of Hades was for the righteous dead up until the time of
the resurrection of Christ (Lk. 16:22, 23:43).[7] After the resurrection of Christ, believers go directly to Heaven when they die (2 Cor. 5:8; 2 Cor. 12:2-4). And so while Hades is a temporary place of confinement (Lk. 23:43; 2 Cor.
12:2-4; Rev. 20:13-14), Gehenna/Hell/The Lake of Fire is an eternal place of
confinement (Rev. 20:10, 20:15). These are some of the differences between Hades and Hell.
Considering the question of whether or not
Christ suffered in Hades, it will help to consider a few specific Bible
passages. The passage in Acts 2:24-32 deals with Christ’s death, burial,
resurrection, and manifestation. And Hades is specifically mentioned in verse
27. In verses 25-28, the apostle Paul quotes from Psalm 16:8-11 and applies
David’s words to Christ. Paul says in Acts 2:31, “[David] looked ahead and
spoke of the resurrection of the Christ, that He was neither abandoned to
Hades, nor did His flesh suffer decay”.
In studying this passage, it will help to
define some key terms. What does Paul mean in Acts 2:24 by “agony of death”?
The word “agony” is the Greek word odin,
the primary definition of it simply means: the pain of childbirth, travail
pain, birth pangs.[8] This is seen from the four New Testament references to odin (Matt. 24:8; Mk. 13:8; Acts 2:24; 1 Thess. 5:3).
Interestingly, Acts 2:24 (where odin
is translated as “agony”) is the only time in the New Testament that odin is not translated as “birth pangs”. Here in Acts 2:24 “the agony of
death” could be an allusion (an implied or indirect reference) to Psalm 18:4-5.
Some think that the “agony” in Acts 2:24
should be equated with the “agony” in Luke 16:24. Although the English language
shows no distinction between the two terms, the Greek language does employ two
distinct Greek words to differentiate between the two terms. As stated
previously, “agony” as found in Acts 2:24 is the Greek word odin, while in Luke 16:24 the word is odunao. The term odunao is found four times in the New Testament and is variously
rendered as “anxiously” (Lk. 2:48), “agony” (Lk. 16:24, 16:26), and “grieving”
(Acts 20:38). Odunao means: to cause
intense pain, to be in anguish, be tormented, to torment or distress one’s
self.[9] It is clear that these individual terms have distinct meanings and contexts and
should not be exactly equated.
Various versions of the Bible have
translated “agony of death” in Acts 2:24 as follows:
- “throes of death” (Weymouth)
- “pains of death” (KJV)
- "horrors of death” (Living Bible)
- "pains of death” (TEV)
- "agony of death” (NIV)
- "bitter pains of death” (Phillips)
- "pangs of death” (RSV)
- "pangs of Hades” (Jerusalem Bible)
- "pangs of death” (NEB)
- " agony of death” (NASB, with a footnote that reads
“Lit., birth pangs”)
In Acts 2:24, Paul is talking about
Christ’s physical bodily resurrection when he says, “God raised Him up again,
putting an end to the agony of death, since it was impossible for Him to be
held in its power”. The context is clearly speaking of physical bodily
resurrection (Acts 2:29, 2:31-32). Furthermore, the word “death” in Acts 2:24
is the Greek word thanatos. The
primary meaning of this word has to do with physical death, not spiritual
death.[10] Thanatos is the word that the gospel
writers (as well as Jesus Himself) used when referring to Christ’s physical
death on the cross (Matt. 20:18, 26:66; Mk. 10:33, 14:64; Lk. 23:15, 23:22,
24:20; Jn. 12:33, 18:32, 21:19; Acts 13:28).
The culture of Jesus’ day understood thanatos to be referring to physical
bodily death. When Jesus said to the Jews, “Truly, truly, I say to you, if
anyone keeps My word he shall never see death [thanatos]” (Jn. 8:51), they clearly understood Jesus to be meaning
physical death (see John 8:52-53). Jesus was speaking connotatively (not
denotatively), using the secondary meaning of thanatos (i.e. speaking spiritually), but this only emphasizes the
fact that the common, denotative, ordinary, and plain meaning of thanatos has to do with physical death
(cf. Matt. 10:21, 15:4; Acts 22:4, 23:29, 25:11; 1 Cor. 11:26) – because if a
word is to have a connotation it must first have a denotation!
Here are some other key Scriptures which
indicate that “death” (thanatos) in
Acts 2:24 is referring to Christ’s physical bodily death:
“Since
then the children share in flesh and blood, He Himself likewise also partook of
the same, that through death [thanatos]
He might render powerless him who had the power of death [thanatos], that is, the devil” (Hebrews 2:14).
“In the
days of His flesh, He offered up both prayers and supplications with loud
crying and tears to the One able to save Him from [NASB footnote: “Or, out of”; also see A.V. marginal note in
the Scofield Study Bible] death [thanatos],
and He was heard because of His piety” (Hebrews 5:7). NOTE: This Bible verse is
referring to Christ’s bodily resurrection, for it is clear that the Father did
not save Christ from physical death on the cross, but the Father did save
Christ out of physical death via Christ’s bodily resurrection.
“And He
Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross that we might die to sin and
live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed” (1 Peter 2:24). NOTE:
Christ bore man’s sin penalty not in hell or hades, but “in His body on the
cross”.[11]
Concerning
Acts 2:24, also consider the following statements by well-known Bible scholars.
A. T. Robertson, the American Baptist theologian and renowned scholar of the
Greek New Testament writes:
The pangs
of death (tas ōdinas tou thanatou).
Codex Bezae has “Hades” instead of death. The LXX has ōdinas thanatou in Psalm 18:4, but the Hebrew original means “snares”
or “traps” or “cords” of death where sheol and death are personified as hunters
laying snares for prey. How Peter or Luke came to use the old Greek word ōdinas (birth pangs) we do not know.
Early Christian writers interpreted the Resurrection of Christ as a birth out
of death. “Loosing” (lusas) suits
better the notion of “snares” held a prisoner by death, but birth pangs do
bring deliverance to the mother also. Because (kathoti). This old conjunction (kata,
hoti) occurs in the N.T. only in Luke’s writings. That he should be holden
(krateisthai auton). Infinitive
present passive with accusative of general reference and subject of ēn adunaton. The figure goes with
“loosed” (lusas) above.[12]
John
Gill, the English Baptist pastor and theologian writes:
“having
loosed the pains of death”; this may be understood either of what Christ had
done for his people by dying for them; he had abolished death; he had took away
its sting, and delivered them from the curse of it, having fulfilled the law,
satisfied justice, and made full atonement for their sin; so that though they
die, death is not a penal evil to them, nor shall they always continue under
the power of it: or of what God did in raising Christ from the dead; he
delivered him from the power of death, by which he was held in the grave, and
which is expressed by a word which signifies pains and sorrows, even those of a
woman in travail; which though he felt not now, he had gone through them; his
low state in the grave was the effect of them . . .[13]
Lewis
Sperry Chafer, the founder and first president of Dallas Theological Seminary
writes:
Here
David affirms not only that he hopes personally of resurrection but that Jesus
Christ, described as the “Holy One,” should not see corruption, that is, stay
in the grave long enough for His body to decay. This passage is quoted by Peter
in Acts 2:24-31 and by Paul in Acts 13:34-37 as indicating the resurrection of
Christ.[14]
The
apostle Paul writes:
And we
preach to you the good news of the promise made to the fathers, that God has
fulfilled this promise to our children in that He raised up Jesus, as it is
also written in the second Psalm, “Thou art My Son; today I have begotten
Thee.” And as for the fact that He raised Him up from the dead, no more to
return to decay, He has spoken in this way: “I will give you the holy and sure
blessings of David.” Therefore He also says in another Psalm, “Thou wilt not
allow Thy Holy One to undergo decay.” For David, after he had served the
purpose of God in his own generation, fell asleep, and was laid among his
fathers, and underwent decay; but He whom God raised did not undergo decay.[15]
I
believe that there is sufficient evidence from the Greek language, the
immediate context, and other Scripture passages so that we can interpret the phrase in Acts 2:24 “putting an end to the agony of
death” (tas ōdinas tou thanatou) –
literally, “the birth pangs of physical death” – as referring to the
resurrection of Christ’s body from the grave. As a result, Christ’s flesh did
not “suffer decay” (Acts 2:27, 31).
Now let's look into the tearing of the temple veil as it relates to the death of
Christ. A proponent of the teaching that Christ suffered in Hades writes:
Yes, the
veil was torn in two before Jesus breathed His last, according to Luke 23:45,
Jesus hadn’t even died yet. Again, everything required by the physical
sacrificial lamb had been accomplished. The veil was torn not so much to
signify the completeness of the sacrifice but to give a physical sign that the
former holy of holies had been rendered ineffective and no longer where God was
going to receive the sacrifices for Israel.
The following is a harmony of the accounts of
Christ’s death in relation to the tearing of the temple veil (taken from the
synoptic gospels).[16] The text is quoted from the New International Version (NIV).[17]
Matthew
27:50-54 50 And
when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. 51 At
that moment the curtain of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom. The
earth shook and the rocks split. 52 The tombs broke open and the bodies of many
holy people who had died were raised to life. 53 They came out of the tombs,
and after Jesus’ resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many
people. 54 When the centurion and those with him who were guarding Jesus saw
the earthquake and all that had happened, they were terrified, and exclaimed,
“Surely he was the Son of God!”
Mark
15:37-39 37 With a
loud cry, Jesus breathed his last. 38 The curtain of the temple was torn in two
from top to bottom. 39 And when the centurion, who stood there in front of
Jesus, heard his cry and saw how he died, he said, “Surely this man was the Son
of God!”
Luke
23:44-47 44 It was
now about the sixth hour, and darkness came over the whole land until the ninth
hour, 45 for the sun stopped shining. And the curtain of the temple was torn in
two. 46 Jesus called out with a loud voice, “Father, into your hands I commit
my spirit.” When he had said this, he breathed his last. 47 The centurion,
seeing what had happened, praised God and said, “Surely this was a righteous
man.”
Matthew and Mark seem to indicate that Christ’s
death occurred prior to the tearing of the temple veil, while Luke seems to
place Christ’s death after the tearing of the curtain. Comparing the three
texts, it seems best to interpret the tearing of the veil as happening
simultaneously with Christ’s death. The veil may have been rent after His
death, but it seems unlikely that the curtain was torn before Christ died.[18] The tearing of the veil signified that because of Christ’s death, access into
God’s presence was now available to everyone (Heb. 6:19-20, 9:6-12, 10:19-22).
Arno C. Gaebelein writes:
The veil
itself was the sign that man was barred from coming to God; that heavy, solid
veil, ever gave that testimony that it is impossible for man to approach God.
The rent veil shows that it has been made possible. The rent veil declares that
the great sacrifice on the cross of the spotless Lamb of God has been accepted.
It is the first great answer of God to the majestic word of the dying savior,
“It is finished.”[19]
Now
concerning the resurrection of Christ, a proponent of the teaching that Christ
suffered in hell writes:
Our
redemption was not “‘finished’ at the cross” . . . That would not be including
what it says in Peter 1:3 “. . . according to His great mercy has caused us to
be born again through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” If what
you say is correct, then it was actually finished at the cross and the need for
3 days and 3 nights in the heart of the earth and the resurrection would add
nothing to the equation of salvation, rendering the resurrection as a
non-essential for salvation.
In
answer to the statement above, I believe that the resurrection was not
punitive, but demonstrative. The resurrection was not “for our” transgressions,
but “for [or “because of” (NASB)] our justification” (Rom. 4:25). Christ’s
death on the cross was “for our sins” (Isa. 53:5-6; 1 Cor. 15:3; Heb. 5:3,
9:15). His resurrection was “because of our justification” – our justification
having been previously accomplished on the cross (Rom. 3:23, 5:9; 2 Cor. 5:21).
Professor John Hart of Moody Bible Institute has well said, “The resurrection
proved our justification, but it did not provide for our justification.”[20] The resurrection is part of the gospel (1 Cor. 15:4). But the resurrection was
not the means by which Christ paid for our sins. It was Christ’s death (thanatos) on the cross that paid the
penalty for our sins (Heb. 9:15) and the reason why we are justified (Rom.
3:23, 5:9; 2 Cor. 5:21). As Lewis Sperry Chafer has said, “It is thus assumed
that as sin caused Christ’s death, so justification necessitated His
resurrection”.[21] Christ rose from the dead, “since it was impossible for Him to be held in its
power” (Acts 2:24; cf. Jn. 20:9). Chafer states again that Romans 4:25
indicates that “. . . having completed the ground of justification by and
through His death and His body having remained the prescribed time in the tomb,
Christ arose”.[22]
Justification (Rom. 5:9), redemption (Eph.
1:7), forgiveness (Eph. 1:7), peace (Eph. 2:13-14; Col. 1:20), and cleansing
(Heb. 9:14) were all accomplished on the cross, not while Christ was in Hades
and not as a result of the resurrection – but a result of His death on the
cross (cf. Rom. 3:24, 5:9; 2 Cor. 5:21). Concerning this, see Lewis Sperry Chafer’s Systematic Theology, in which he deals with these topics and Romans
4:25.
Let's move on to discuss whether
Christ possessed power over His Spirit, or whether it was “given over to God to
pay the spiritual price for our sin, death, and separation,” as some believe.
There are texts that indicate that Christ’s death occurred because He willed
it. Even before Christ went to the cross He told His disciples, “For this
reason the Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it
again. No one has taken it away from Me, but I lay it down on My own
initiative. I have authority to lay it down, and I have authority to take it up
again. This commandment I received from My Father” (Jn. 10:17-18).[23] In Matthew 27:50 it says that “Jesus . . . yielded up His spirit” (i.e. He
physically died). Similarly, John 19:30 states that Jesus “gave up His spirit”.
Luke 23:46 seems to indicate that Christ was in control of His spirit until His
death. And in Galatians 2:20 the apostle Paul says that “the Son of God . . .
delivered Himself up”. Louis Barbieri, the chair of the Department of Theology
at the Moody Bible Institute in Chicago writes:
With one
last cry Jesus . . . gave up His spirit, committing it into the hands of His
Father (Luke 23:46). Jesus was in complete control of His life and died at the
precise moment He determined by dismissing His spirit. No man took Jesus’ life
from Him, as He had said (John 10:11, 15, 17-18). He laid His life down in
keeping with God’s plan and He was involved in taking it back up again in His
resurrection.[24]
It
is true that the Father also played a part in delivering up His Son (Rom. 4:25,
8:32). But in Galatians 2:20 and Ephesians 5:2 we see the self-surrender of the
Son. I believe the union of these two truths can be seen in passages like
Psalms 40:8-9, “I delight to do thy will” and John 10:18, “This commandment I
received from my Father”. I believe Lewis Sperry Chafer rightly says concerning
Christ, “That He was delivered [into the hands of sinful men to be put to death
on the cross] intimates that aspect of His death which reckons it a deed at the
hand of God and equally a work of wicked men [Lk. 24:20; Acts 2:23]. There is
an aspect in which it is true that no man took His life from Him (John 10:18)”.[25]
Let me discuss another statement made by
someone who thinks that Jesus suffered in hell. The individual writes:
In John
20:17, Jesus told Mary to “stop clinging to Me; for I have not yet ascended to
my Father…” He had not yet presented the whole of His sacrifice before the
altar in the true holy place in heaven. Then and only then would the total
sacrifice be finished in body and spirit.
In
regards to John 20:17, Lewis Sperry Chafer makes some interesting comments in
which he gives evidence that seems to indicate that Christ ascended on the
resurrection morning and presented Himself before the Father in fulfillment of
various Old Testament types:
- The two birds, the first of which was killed while
the second was dipped in its blood and set free (Lev. 14:4-7).[26]
- The high priest on the Day of Atonement went into
the holy of holies and applied blood to the mercy seat (Lev. 16:14).
The sheaf of the first-fruits (Lev. 23:9-14). C.
H. Macintosh sets forth the idea that in the Passover Christ’s death is
pictured, in the sheaf of the first-fruits Christ’s resurrection is pictured,
and in the feast of Pentecost the descent of the Holy Spirit upon the church is
pictured.[27]
In
distinction to Chafer, Charles Ryrie states:
Some
think that John 20:17 indicates one or more ascensions before the one detailed
in Acts 1. However, the verb “I ascend” is most likely a futuristic present
referring to the coming public ascension of Acts 1 and referring to it with
certainty. It is as if the Lord were saying to Mary, “Stop clinging to Me.
There is no need for this, as I am not yet at the point of permanent ascension.
You will still have the opportunity to see Me. However, there is no question
but that I certainly will ascend to My Father”.[28]
Similarly,
John Walvoord writes:
The
question has been raised whether Christ ascended into heaven prior to the event
recorded in Acts 1. A number of expositors teach that Christ ascended to heaven
on the day of His resurrection based on the implications of John 20:17 and
Hebrews 9:6-20. They argue that just as the high priest in the Old Testament
observed the Day of Atonement by taking blood into the holy of holies and
sprinkling the mercy seat, so Christ, a new High Priest after a higher order,
on the day of His resurrection applied the blood of His sacrifice to heaven
itself.
This concept of an immediate ascension
into heaven after His resurrection has been refuted, however, by able
scholarship. Most conservative theologians hold that the work of Christ was
finished on the cross and that the physical application of the blood never
extended beyond the cross itself. Hebrews 9:12, which states that Christ
entered into the holy place, properly translated by the American Standard Version
indicates that it was “through his own blood” (dia with a genitive) rather than with His blood.
The statement to Mary in John 20:17 (ASV),
“Touch me not; for I ascend unto my Father and your Father, and to my God and
your God,” actually is a prediction rather than a statement of immediate
accomplishment. It is probable that the verb “I ascend” is a futuristic use of
the present tense as A. T. Robertson points out. [A. T. Robertson, A Grammar of the Greek New Testament in the
Light of Historical Research, p. 880.] In view of the fact that Christ
appeared to others not long after His appearance to Mary Magdalene, it is
unlikely that there would be a rapid ascension into heaven and return in a
comparative few minutes. Many, therefore, have concluded that it is improbable
that Christ ascended in a formal way to heaven until the event of Acts 1.[29]
Whenever Christ ascended, the Scriptures
are clear that Christ’s presentation of Himself in heaven did not add to His
finished work on the cross, for “He entered the holy place once for all, having obtained eternal redemption”
(Heb. 9:12, emphasis added). The propitiation therefore was already
accomplished when Christ presented Himself in heaven. It is significant that
Christ is said to have entered heaven “through” (not “with”) His blood (Heb.
9:12).[30] Christ obtained eternal redemption when He died, not when He presented Himself
in heaven. F. W. Grant states the point well when he writes:
Where
shall we expect to find it if not in Hebrews, where confessedly the Day of
Atonement is the text upon which the apostle is dwelling in all this part? And
where is it to be found in Hebrews, or anywhere else in the New Testament, that
Christ went into heaven to make propitiation there? . . . Quite another thing
is, in fact, taught there, - namely, that Christ entered in once into the holy
places, having obtained eternal
redemption. As risen from the dead, raised up by the glory of the Father, He
entered once, not the second time, propitiation therefore already accomplished,
the resurrection the evidence of the ransom accepted . . . .”[31]
We
must not make the mistake of building a doctrine on an Old Testament type
alone. It has been said that “no parable can teach doctrine”.[32] F. W. Grant elaborates by saying, “We must find elsewhere the doctrine which
the type illustrates, before we can find the ground for a just application”.[33]
I believe that after Christ ascended in
Acts 2, He appeared in heaven as the antitype, or fulfillment, of the Old
Testament types. This act of Christ appearing in heaven “through His blood” (Heb.
9:12) simply demonstrated the value of His completed sacrifice on the cross.
Concerning this matter, Dwight Pentecost writes:
Specifically,
Christ’s sacrifice is the ultimate fulfillment of the Day of Atonement. At the
Cross, God was the one being propitiated (satisfied); the blood of Christ was
that which propitiated a holy God; the body of Christ was the place of
propitiation (the mercy seat); and all guilty sinners were those for whom
propitiating blood was being offered to God.[34]
In
reference to Hebrews 9:12, several other quotes may prove helpful. Sir Robert
Anderson writes:
But
having entered there [heaven] in virtue of His blood – that is, of the death by
which He put away sin – He is there by a title that He can share with His
people. Therefore is it that He is the mercy-seat – the meeting-place between
God and men. Twice only does this word occur in the New Testament: in Heb. ix.
5 it refers to the typical “propitiatory,” and in Rom. iii. 25 to Christ
Himself, the antitype.[35]
The words
of [Hebrews 9] verse 12 are, “Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by
His own blood, He entered in once for all into the holy place, having obtained
eternal redemption.” It is not the Priest going in to make atonement – to
finish an unfinished work – but the Mediator going in on the ground of a work
finished and complete.[36]
The
assistant superintendent of the Moody Bible Institute under R. A. Torrey,
William R. Newell writes:
having obtained eternal redemption at the
Cross: pardon, justification, reconciliation, association . . . through (dia) His own blood,
reveal that Christ entered Heaven with a memorial of His own sacrifice. . . . He entered in by virtue of His blood. He
might have entered Heaven at any moment during His perfect life here. But He
would have gone alone as He came alone. But He has not entered Heaven in that
way. Always pleasing unto the Father, through
the eternal Spirit He offered Himself without blemish {at the Cross} unto God (vs. 14).[37]
John 20:17 is an intriguing text and needs
to be examined in light of the Greek language. Is Jesus prohibiting Mary from
touching Him when He tells her in John 20:17a, “Touch me not” (KJV)? This seems
to be the case when this verse is read in many translations. However, in the
Greek language the verb “touch” is a present imperative. R. V. G. Tasker,
Professor Emeritus of New Testament Exegesis at the University of London
writes, “...when used as a prohibition this should normally give the meaning
‘Stop touching me’ or ‘Do not touch me any more’. A more correct translation
would therefore be, ‘Do not cling to Me’ (RSV ‘Do not hold me’).”[38] Similarly, A. T. Robertson, the American scholar of New Testament Greek writes:
Touch me
not (mē mou aptou). Present middle
imperative in prohibition with genitive case, meaning “cease clinging to me”
rather than “Do not touch me.” Jesus allowed the women to take hold of his feet
(ekratēsan) and worship (prosekunēsan) as we read in Matthew
28:9.[39]
And so we see that in John 20:17a, Jesus
is not prohibiting Mary from touching Him, Jesus is telling Mary to stop
clinging to Him (an act she had already begun). Concerning the phrase “I am not
yet ascended” in John 20:17b, Tasker writes, “The verb translated I am not yet
ascended is in the perfect tense, and implies, ‘I have not yet completed my
ascent’.”[40] It is also interesting to note that the phrase “I ascend” in John 20:17c is a
present active indicative Greek verb.[41] Greek scholar William D. Mounce writes:
The
present active indicative verb in Greek is basically the same as in English. It
describes an action that usually occurs in the present. It can be either a
continuous (“I am studying”) or undefined (“I study”) action. We recommend using a continuous translation
by default, and if it does not fit the context switch to the undefined”
(emphasis added).[42]
In
light of Mounce's statement above, the phrase “I ascend” in John 20:17 should more accurately be
translated “I am ascending”. Tasker states, “I ascend should be taken as a
continuous present “I am in the process of ascending’.”[43] In light of the Greek language, John 20:17 could be translated, “Stop clinging
to Me, for I have not yet completed My ascent; but go to My brethren, and say
to them, ‘I am in the process of ascending to My Father and your Father, and My
God and your God.’”
Edwin A. Blum gives this very helpful
commentary on John 20:17:
She may
have embraced Him physically, for the Lord responded, Do not hold on to Me, for
I have not yet returned to the Father. Go instead to My brothers and tell them.
. . These words spoke of a new relationship, new relatives, and a new
responsibility. Many wanted to “hold onto” Jesus. The KJV translation “Touch Me
not,” has caused many interpreters to wonder why He could not be “touched.” The
NIV translation is more accurate, for He certainly was not untouchable (cf.
Matt. 28:9; John 20:27). Mary had lost Jesus once before (at His crucifixion)
and it was natural to fear the loss of His presence again.
Jesus said, in effect, “This (the physical
contact) is not My real presence for the church. A new relationship will begin
with My Ascension and the gift of the Holy Spirit to the church.” Jesus then
explained the fact of the new relatives. He called His disciples His brothers.
Earlier He had said they were friends: “I no longer call you servants . . .
instead, I have called you friends” (15:15). Believers in Jesus become a part
of Jesus’ family with God as their Father (cf. Heb. 2:11-12; Rom. 8:15-17, 29;
Gal. 3:26). Mary’s new responsibility was to testify to His risen presence.[44]
Chafer’s argument for more than one
ascension of Christ is well stated, but I am inclined to side with Walvoord.
Regardless of the time of Christ’s ascension, I believe Christ’s sacrifice and
our redemption was finished on the cross when He cried “It is finished!” Based
on Hebrews 9:12 (“through His own blood. . . having obtained eternal
redemption”), I believe that the historical fact of Christ’s blood shed on
Calvary was the ground of man’s redemption (the resurrection then being the
receipt of our previously accomplished redemption) and heaven’s cleansing.
Let me address another quote in which
someone has said, “I believe that Christ suffered my punishment in hell, that
is not adding to the gospel”. I believe that when someone says “Christ suffered my punishment in hell” it is subtracting from the gospel – it is subtracting from the worth of Christ’s
death on the cross. It is also subtracting from Christ’s cry from the cross, when He said “It is finished!” (John 19:30). I don’t want to
say that it is adding to the gospel when someone says “Christ suffered my punishment in hell”, but I do know that when
the apostle Paul explains the gospel in 1 Corinthians chapter 15, he says
nothing about Christ suffering in hell – or in hades for that matter. The
gospel is:
1.) Christ
died for our sins . . . (1 Cor. 15:3b). Where did Christ die for our
sins? The Scriptures clearly declare that Christ died for our sins on the cross
(“on a tree” – Gal. 3:13; “through a cross” – Eph. 2:16; “His cross” – Col.
1:20, “the cross” – Col. 2:14; “on the cross” – 1 Pet. 2:24, “For Christ also died for sins once for
all...having been put to death in the flesh” – 1 Pet. 3:18). In fact, the cross
is so pivotal that Paul uses the term as a synonym for the gospel (1 Cor.
1:17).
2.) Christ
was buried . . . (1 Cor. 15:4a). The text does not say that He was buried for
our sins, but simply that He was buried. Christ’s death on the cross and His
shed blood there on the cross (not His burial) completely satisfied the righteous
demands of the Father (Rom. 3:25, 5:9; Col. 1:20).
3.) Christ
was raised . . . (1 Cor. 15:4b; cf. Lk. 24:7,
24:21; Acts 10:40).[45]
4.) Christ
was seen . . . (1 Cor. 15:5).
Hence,
Paul’s gospel says nothing specifically about Christ suffering in hell or in hades.
Another question has been asked by someone trying to argue that Christ suffered in the flames of hell:
Did Jesus
suffer the hell penalty for your sins? Isn’t hell fire what you deserve? The
just chastening for your sin? Isaiah 53:5,6 “But He was pierced through for our
transgressions, He was crushed for our iniquities; the chastening for our well
being fell upon Him . . . but the Lord caused the iniquity of us all to fall
upon Him.”
God’s Word speaks of Christ’s
substitutionary death on the cross, not His substitutionary suffering in hell
or hades. Isaiah 52:13-53:12 refers to Christ’s death on the cross. It was
there that the sinless One died for the sins of many. The Scriptures teach,
“the wages of sin is death” (Rom. 6:23).[46] I deserved to die, but Christ died in my place: “for while we were still
helpless, at the right time Christ died for
the ungodly (Rom. 5:6).[47] The word “for” is the Greek word huper,
primarily meaning “on behalf of, for the sake of, instead of”. Christ tasted
death “for every man” (Heb. 2:9); He
died for us (Rom. 5:8). On the cross,
Christ died in my place. What was the result of Christ’s death on the cross?
Romans 5:9 says, “Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we
shall be saved from the wrath of God through Him.” 1 Peter 3:18 says, “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”.
As I stated earlier, I believe that Christ
was in hades between His death and resurrection, but I do not believe that He
was suffering there. Let me explain. Christ prophesied that He would be three
days and three nights in the heart of the earth (Matt. 12:40). Acts 2:27 tells
us that Christ was in “Hades” after His death. Thus the “heart of the earth” is
synonymous with “Hades” or sheol (cf. Psa. 16:10). Even though Christ was
raised on the third day (Lk. 24:7, 24:21; Acts 10:40; 1 Cor. 15:4), and not
after three days, Jesus’ prediction still held true because the Jews reckoned
any part of a day as a full day. But Jesus also said to the thief on the cross
next to Him, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with me in Paradise”.
Therefore, Paradise must have been in “the heart of the earth” (Matt. 12:40).
Paradise must have been synonymous with hades. Is this consistent with the
Scriptures? I believe that it is. In Luke chapter 16, Christ told the true
story (actual accounts of events use proper names) of Lazarus, after his death,
went to a place called Abraham’s bosom. The Greek scholar A. T. Robertson has
said, “To be in Abraham’s bosom is to the Jew to be in paradise”.[48] I believe that “Sheol”, “the heart of the earth”, “Paradise”, “Abraham’s bosom”
and “Hades” all refer to the same compartment of Hades. Luke 16:19-31 makes
this clear. On one side of the “great chasm” (Lk. 16:26) Lazarus was
“comforted” (Lk. 16:25a), while on the other side the rich man was in “agony”
in the flames (Lk. 16:25b). The bible says that due to the great chasm, no one
could cross over to the opposite side (Lk. 16:26). To review, Christ said that
He would be in the center of the earth after His death (Matt. 12:40), the book
of Acts further clarifies the place as being Hades (Acts 2:27), and Christ
specifically told the thief they were going to Paradise (Lk. 23:43). Therefore,
I believe that Christ went to the upper compartment of Hades (remember that in
luke 16:23 the rich man “lifted his eyes,” therefore he was in lower Hades), or
“Abraham’s bosom” as Luke calls it, during the “three days and three nights”
following His death and prior to His resurrection. Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest
writes:
In Acts
2:27, 31, our Lord at His death went to Hades, the passage in Acts being quoted
from Psalm 16:, where the Hebrew is “Sheol.” His soul was not left in Hades,
the “paradise” portion, nor did His body in Joseph’s tomb see corruption, for
He was raised from the dead on the third day. He as the Man Christ Jesus,
possessing a human soul and spirit, as He possessed a human body, entered the
abode of the righteous dead, having committed the keeping of His spirit to God
the Father (Luke 23:46).[49]
In light of this, there are at least two
positive references to Hades in the New Testament. The first positive reference
is in Luke 16:25 (“Abraham’s bosom”) and the second one is in Luke 23:43 where
Christ said to the thief on the cross, “Today you will be with me in Paradise”.
There are a number of positive references
to Sheol in the Old Testament. Like
Hades in the New Testament, Sheol in
the Old Testament had two compartments – one for the wicked dead and one for
the blessed dead. Looking insightfully at the text, we can conclude that Sheol was the destination of godly
individuals upon death, such as:
1.) Job (Job
14:13-14) – J. Dwight Pentecost states that Sheol
“was regarded as temporary and the righteous anticipated the resurrection out
of it into the millennial age (Job 14:13-14; 19:25, 27; Ps. 16:9-11; 17:15;
49:15; 73:24)”.[50]
2.) Abraham (Gen.
25:8; Lk. 16:22-30) – Abraham was “gathered to his people” after his death,
therefore he was not the first saved individual in Sheol. That he was there can be seen from the account in Luke 16,
which specifically mentions him as being in Paradise.
3.) Isaac (Gen.
35:29) – Like his father before him, Isaac was “gathered to his people” and
therefore went to be with Abraham in Sheol.
4.) Jacob (Gen.
44:29; 49:33) – Jacob expected to go to Sheol
(Gen. 44:29). Upon his death he was “gathered to his people” and joined the
saved in “Abraham’s bosom” (Lk. 16:22).
5.) Samuel (1 Sam.
28:13-15) – The biblical text indicates that the Samuel spoken of in this
account is actually Samuel the prophet. Apparently God permitted Samuel to
speak with King Saul and the spirit medium. It seems evident that this miracle
was not from the witch due to her surprise and fright at seeing Samuel. The
Bible says that Samuel “came up out of the earth” (1 Sam. 28:13). This is
consistent with how Sheol is
described elsewhere in the Bible – as being down, or in the center of the earth
(cf. Num. 16:30; Amos 9:2; Jonah 2:2; Matt. 12:40). It is consistent with the
Scriptures to say that Samuel was in Sheol
and that he was allowed by God to rise to speak with King Saul. Samuel
prophesied that King Saul and his sons would be killed by the Philistines and
said that “tomorrow you and your sons will be with me” (1 Sam. 28:19).
6.) Saul and
his sons (1 Sam. 28:19) – We can conclude that Saul and his sons went
to be with Samuel in Sheol upon their
deaths.
7.) David and
his child (2 Sam. 12:23; 1 Kings 2:10; Psa. 88:3)
8.) Solomon (1 Kings
11:42-43)
9.) Daniel (Dan.
12:13; cf. 1 Sam. 28:15; Lk. 16:25)
10.) All men (Psa. 89:48) – Therefore
all the blessed dead are seen to be enjoying rest and comfort (1 Sam. 28:15;
Dan. 12:13; Lk. 16:25) in Sheol,
separated of course from the wicked dead who are in conscious torment there
(Isa. 14:9-11).
Let me quickly answer a few objections
before moving on. Some may wonder how Enoch and Elijah fit into the concept of Sheol being in the center of the earth
because both men are said to have gone to heaven, not Sheol (Gen. 5:22-24; 2 Kings 2:1). I believe that this objection is
easily answered when it is remembered that Sheol
is the temporary place of the dead.[51] Since neither Enoch nor Elijah died, they would have no right or reason to go
to Sheol. Instead, I believe they
went straight to Heaven – possibly waiting a future assignment (see Revelation
11:3-12). But (it might be argued) how can sinful men stand in God’s presence? One
thing is certain – God’s Word states that Elijah went to Heaven (2 Kings 2:1).
And if Satan can stand before God (Job 1:6, 2:1), surely Elijah is not as bad
as Satan! Furthermore, the apostle Paul in the New Testament, still in his
sinful body, says that he was caught up to Paradise (2 Cor. 12:4). I believe
that God, in His grace, “passed over” the sins of those who lived before
Christ’s death (Rom. 3:25; Heb. 9:15). Their sins were covered year by year by
the blood sprinkled on the mercy seat, but not completely removed until
Calvary. In light of this, it seems consistent to believe that Elijah could be,
like Paul was in 2 Corinthians 12:4, in the “third heaven”.
Another objection that may be raised
concerns the transfiguration. How is it that Moses, who had died and gone to
Sheol, could be seen talking to Christ (Matt. 17:3; Mk. 9:4; Lk. 9:30)? It
seems that God raised Moses from Sheol similar to the prophet Samuel before him
(1 Sam. 28:13-15). Although I do not believe that the souls in Sheol possess
physical bodies, it seems they are still recognizably similar to what their
physical bodies looked like (1 Sam. 28:14, cf. 1 Sam. 15:27). It is interesting
that the rich man in Hades is described as having eyes, fingers, and a tongue
(Lk. 16:23-24). Therefore I believe that Moses appeared to the disciples in a
form similar to that of his physical body.[52]
Now concerning the Greek word abussos, meaning abyss. This word is a
general term that describes a deep bath or a deep place, including Hades (Rom.
10:7), tartarus (Lk. 8:31; 2 Pet. 2:4; Jude 1:6), and the bottomless pit (Rev.
9:1, 9:2, 9:11, 11:7, 17:8, 20:1, 20:3). Abussos
is often used in the Septuagint (the Greek translation of the Hebrew Old
Testament) and describes, for instance, the waters of the earth before creation
(Gen. 1:2), and the subterranean fountains that opened during the flood (Gen.
7:11, 8:2). Douglas Moo writes, “the ‘sea’ and the ‘abyss’ were somewhat
interchangeable concepts in the OT and in Judaism; and some Aramaic paraphrases
of the Deut. 30:13 used the language of the abyss.”[53]
To understand what abussos means in Romans
10:7, we must understand the immediate context. We cannot impose a meaning from
a different context onto the context of Romans 10:7. To do this would be reading
something into the text that the author did not intend. Romans 10:7 is a loose
quote from Deuteronomy 30:13, “Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say,
‘Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we
may observe it?”
Romans 10:7 is referring, I believe, to
the resurrection of Christ from the dead (Rom. 10:7b), and possibly is a
reference to Hades. It is clear that Hades is in the deep, for it is called a
“pit” (Num. 16:30, 16:33; Job 17:16), Samuel is said to have come up out of it
(1 Sam. 28:13), and Christ said that He would be “in the heart of the earth”
(Matt. 12:40). Amos 9:2 describes a contrast much like Paul does in Romans
10:7. Amos says, “Though they dig into Sheol, from there shall My hand take
them; and though they ascend to heaven, from there will I bring them down”.
Here I quote Wayne Grudem concerning
Romans 10:6-7:
These
verses contain two rhetorical questions, again Old Testament quotations (from
Deut. 30:13): “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that
is, to bring Christ down) or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to
bring Christ up from the dead).” But this passage hardly teaches that Christ
descended into hell. The point of the passage is that Paul is telling people
not to ask these questions, because Christ is not far away – he is near – and
faith in him is as near as confessing with our mouth and believing in our heart
(v. 9). These prohibited questions are questions of unbelief, not assertions of
what Scripture teaches. However, some may object that Paul would not have
anticipated that his readers would ask such questions unless it was widely
known that Christ did in fact descend “into the abyss.” However, even if this
were true, Scripture would not be saying or implying that Christ went into
“hell” (in the sense of a place of punishment from the dead, ordinarily
expressed by Gk. Geenna), but rather
that he went into “the abyss” (G,. abyssos,
a term which often in the LXX is used of the depths of the ocean [Gen. 1:2;
7:11; 8:2; Deut. 8:7; Ps. 106 (107):26], but it can also apparently refer just
to the realm of the dead [Ps. 70 (71):20]).[54]
Paul here uses the word “deep” (abyssos) as a contrast to “heaven” in
order to give the sense of a place that is unreachable, inaccessible to human
beings. The contrast is not, “Who shall go to find Christ in a place of great
blessing (heaven) or a place of great punishment (hell)?” but rather, “Who
shall go to find Christ in a place that is inaccessibly high (heaven) or in a
place that is inaccessibly low (the deep, or the realm of death)?”[55]
Similarly,
William R. Newell writes:
Our Lord
plainly said he would be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth
(Matt. 12.40). This was not Joseph’s tomb (which was on the surface of the
earth), but the Hebrew Sheol (Greek, Hades), which is always in Scripture
located below the earth’s surface – even “the lower parts of the earth” (Eph.
4.9). To another compartment of these “lower parts” the wicked also went; as
see Ps. 63.9. That this was in the general region called Hades, the rich man of
Luke 16.22,23 proves. (Always read the Revised Version about the words Sheol – Hades: for it transliterates them. The King James simply obscures
them by various renderings.) While Christ’s body lay in Joseph’s tomb “not
seeing corruption,” His soul (or quickened spirit, I Peter 3.18) – as Peter and
Paul, quoting Ps. 16.10, plainly show (Acts 2.31; 13.34, 37) was duly brought
up again “from the depths of the earth” (Ps. 71.20).[56]
After Christ ascended I believe a change
took place that affected Paradise, or upper Hades.[57] The Paradise section of Hades was removed from the “heart of the earth” and taken
into the presence of God in heaven. Paul said in 2 Corinthians 12:2-4 that he was
“caught up to the third heaven . . . into Paradise”. Believers in the New
Testament, upon their death, are said to be “absent from the body” and “at home
with the Lord” (2 Cor. 5:8). In Philippians 1:23, Paul said that he would
“depart and be with Christ” upon his death. It seems clear that Paradise is no
longer below, in the earth, but above, in heaven.
It does not appear that any change has
taken place in lower Hades. I believe the unsaved in lower Hades await their
resurrection to the Great White Throne judgment of Revelation 20:11-15. At the
judgment of the Great White Throne, Hades gives up the dead that are in it
(Rev. 20:13) and they, being lost, are thrown into the eternal lake of fire –
also known as Hell (Matt. 25:41; Mk. 9:43-44; Rev. 20:10).
I believe the Biblical evidence supporting
the position that Christ suffered in hell – or even in Hades – is weak at best.
It would be foolish for me to change my position based on a few controversial
texts, which I believe can be explained to mean something other than Christ
suffering in hell. These explanations I have tried to set forth in this/my
paper. I believe there are more passages, clearer texts, better exegesis, and a
greater degree of Scriptural harmony supporting the position that Christ's
suffering took place and was completed on the cross, not in Hades and not/nor
in Hell.
Appendix
A
“Verily I
say unto thee, today” (Luke 23:43)
What did Jesus say to the repentant thief
hanging next to Him on the cross? Did He say, “Truly I say to you, today you
shall be with Me in Paradise” (NASB) or “Truly I say to you today, you shall be
with Me in Paradise”? The question of the comma has great significance, for its
placement changes the whole meaning of Christ’s statement. By placing the comma
before “today”, Christ would be emphasizing when the thief would be with Him in
Paradise. By placing the comma after “today”, Christ would be emphasizing when
He was talking to the thief, and His statement would simply mean that at some
undefined point, the thief would be with Him in Paradise.
We cannot go to the original Greek to
answer this question. The question is concerning the placement of a single
comma, and the original Greek language had no commas. Therefore, other means
must be relied upon to determine the meaning of Christ’s statement. First, the
author will appeal to common sense. Second, cross-references will be consulted
to shed light on this text. Third, other translations will be consulted.
First, common sense demonstrates that the
comma should be placed before “today”. Christ was not saying, “Truly I say to
you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise” for that would be nonsense (to
place the comma after today). Of course Christ was talking to the thief when it
was “today”! He was not talking to the thief when it was “yesterday” or
“tomorrow”! Christ was not emphasizing when He was talking to the thief, Christ
was emphasizing when the thief would be with Him in Paradise!
Second, cross-references demonstrate that
the word “today” should be excluded from the introductory statement of Christ
in Luke 23:43. The Scriptures clearly indicate that the comma should be placed
before “today” in Luke 23:43. The phrase “Verily I say unto thee” (Lk. 23:43)
is a common expression in the New Testament. Every time this expression is used
in the New Testament it is never “Verily I say unto thee today”, but simply
“Verily I say unto thee”. This phrase is
simply an introductory statement emphasizing that something is true, the
speaker then proceeds to explain what it is that is true. The exact phrase
“Verily I say unto thee” occurs nine times in the Greek text (Matt. 5:26,
26:34; Mk. 14:30; Lk. 23:43; Jn. 3:3, 3:5, 3:11, 13:38, 21:18). In the New
Testament the word “today” is never included in the expression “Verily I say
unto thee”. Likewise, the phrase “Verily I say unto you” – being almost
identical in construction – also omits the word “today” every time it occurs in
the New Testament (Matt. 5:18, 6:2, 6:5, 6:16, 8:10, 10:15, 10:23, 10:42,
11:11, 13:17, 16:28, 17:20, 18:3, 18:13, 18:18, 19:23, 19:28, 21:21, 21:31,
23:36, 24:2, 24:34, 24:47, 25:12, 25:40, 25:45, 26:13, 26:21; Mk. 3:28, 6:11, 8:12,
9:1, 9:41, 10:15, 10:29, 11:23, 12:43, 13:30, 14:9, 14:18, 14:25; Lk. 4:24,
11:51, 12:37, 13:35, 18:17, 21:32; Jn. 1:51, 5:19, 5:24, 5:25, 6:26, 6:32,
6:47, 6:53, 8:34, 8:51, 8:58, 10:1, 10:7, 12:24, 13:16, 13:20, 13:21, 14:12,
16:20, 16:23). To include “today” in Christ’s introductory statement (“Verily I
say unto thee”) demonstrates either an ignorance of Scripture or a theological
bias. Sixty-eight cross-references clearly indicate that Luke 23:43 should
correctly read, “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt
thou be with me in paradise” (KJV).
Third, various translations, versions, and
interlinears indicate that the word “today” should be excluded from the
introductory statement of Christ in Luke 23:43. The following Bibles place the
comma before the word “today”, thus excluding it from Christ’s introductory
statement:
- King James Version
- The Living Bible
- Phillips Modern English
- Revised Standard Version
- Today’s English Version
- New International Version
- The Jerusalem Bible
- The New English Bible
- The Weymouth New Testament
- New American Standard Bible
- And even the Greek Interlinear (Today’s Parallel
Greek-English New Testament)!
In
fact, the only Bible (that I’m aware of) to include the word “today” in
Christ’s introductory statement is the Jehovah Witness’ New World Translation! However, Greek scholars agree that the New World Translation is totally
unreliable. Dr. Robert Countess, who wrote a doctoral dissertation on the Greek
of the New World Translation,
concluded that the translation “must be viewed as a radically biased piece of
work. At some points it is actually dishonest. At others it is neither modern
nor scholarly.”[58] British scholar H. H. Rowley asserted, “From beginning to end this volume is a
shining example of how the Bible should not be translated.”[59] Rowley went on to say that the New World
Translation is “an insult to the Word of God.”[60] Dr. Julius Mantey, author of A Manual
Grammar of the Greek New Testament, calls the New World Translation “a shocking mistranslation.”[61] Dr. Bruce M. Metzger, professor of New Testament at Princeton University, calls
it “a frightful mistranslation,” “erroneous,” “pernicious,” and
“reprehensible”.[62] Dr. William Barclay concluded that “the deliberate distortion of truth by this
sect is seen in their New Testament translation . . . . It is abundantly clear
that a sect which can translate the New Testament like that is intellectually
dishonest.”[63] Those who advocate that the word “today” should be included in Christ’s
introductory statement have not based their argument on God’s Word. Instead,
(whether conscious of the fact or not) their argument is supported only by a
translation condemned as unscholarly and heretical.
In conclusion, it is evident that Luke
23:43 has been correctly translated by the overwhelming majority of modern
versions and translations. Common sense, cross-references, and the majority of
translations indicate that the word “today” should correctly remain after the
comma in Luke 23:43, thus excluding it from Christ’s introductory statement.
Appendix
B
FAR AWAY
or WITH ME?
An Examination of Luke 16:23 and Luke 23:43
Those who advocate that Christ suffered in
Hades must deal with Luke 23:43, “Truly I say to you, today you shall be with
Me in Paradise”. In order to harmonize this passage with their belief that
Christ suffered in Hades, proponents of that position define the phrase “with
me” (Lk. 23:43) in an interesting way. They state that “with me” actually means
“in the general vicinity of”; “with me generally”; “in the same general area
with me”. With this definition, Christ could have suffered in Hades, while the
thief – in the same general vicinity but on the other side of the “great chasm”
(Lk. 16:26) – enjoyed Paradise.
Luke 16:19-31 tells the true story (real
names and real places are spoken of) of just such a situation. Is the rich man
suffering in Hades described as being “with” Lazarus while he enjoys Paradise
in Abraham’s bosom? That should be the scenario according to those who advocate
that Christ suffered in Hades. But the Scriptures actually state exactly the
opposite. Instead of the rich man being “with” Lazarus, the two are said to be
“far away” from each other (Lk. 16:23). The phrase “far way” is used five other
times in the King James Version of the Bible (Mk. 14:54, 15:40; Rev. 18:10,
18:15, 18:17) and is translated as “a distance” each time (it is never
translated as “with”).
In our language, it is obvious that the
terms “with” (Lk. 23:43) and “far away” (Lk. 16:23) have very different
meanings. The Greek language also affirms that the terms “with” and “far away”
have different meanings. The term “with” (Lk. 23:43) is the Greek word meta which primarily means amid, with,
or in the midst, and denotes accompaniment. The term “far away” (Lk. 16:23)
comes from two Greek words. The word “far” is the Greek word makrothen, which means far, a far, long,
or from a distance. The word “away” is the Greek word apo which means from, away from, of, or off. The term apo indicates the separation of a person
or an object from another person or an object which were formerly united but
are now separated.[64] Thus the phrase “far away” (Lk. 16:23) speaks of a far separation from
something, while the term “with” (Lk. 23:43) denotes accompaniment.
On the cross, Jesus said to the dying
thief next to Him, “Truly I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise”
(Lk. 23:43). Jesus could not have meant that although He would be suffering in
Hades while the thief enjoyed Paradise “far away,” they would be in the same
general vicinity. The term “with” in Luke 23:43 and the phrase “far away” in
Luke 16:23 prohibits such an interpretation. Notice that Jesus said to the
thief, “today you will be with Me in Paradise”. Jesus did not say, “today you
will be far away from Me in Paradise”. It is quite obvious that the thief could
not be “with” Jesus and “far away” from Jesus at the same time. Hence, it is
clear that after his death, Jesus was not “far away” across the great chasm
suffering in Hades, but was “with” the repentant thief in Paradise!
