Posted on 09/21/2009 10:14:12 AM PDT by NYer
Years ago while listening to Hank Hanegraaff’s Bible Answer Man radio program, a caller called in about “Christ suffering in Hell.” Hank rightly explained that “Christ suffering in Hell” is not a biblical doctrine, but noted that the doctrine was held by John Calvin. Hank respectfully disagreed with Calvin.
We can argue back and forth over Calvin’s doctrine of baptism or predestination, but Calvin is a manifest heretic regarding Christ’s descent into hell. He breaks with Scripture and all the Fathers in this regard, and his error deserves more attention, because it shows the cracks in his systematic theology. During my three years at Westminster Theological Seminary in Philadelphia, nobody wanted to touch this with a ten-foot pole.
So that you can get Calvin in context, I’ve provided the full section from Calvin’s Institutes of the Christian Religion Book II, Chapter 16, 10 in full. The red inserts are mine.
But, apart from the Creed, we must seek for a surer exposition of Christ’s descent to hell: and the word of God furnishes us with one not only pious and holy, but replete with excellent consolation. Nothing had been done if Christ had only endured corporeal death. In order to interpose between us and God’s anger, and satisfy his righteous judgement, it was necessary that he should feel the weight of divine vengeance. Whence also it was necessary that he should engage, as it were, at close quarters with the powers of hell and the horrors of eternal death [What!!! Christ suffered eternal death and the pains the hell!].
We lately quoted from the Prophet, that the “chastisement of our peace was laid upon him” that he “was bruised for our iniquities” that he “bore our infirmities;” [ [the authors of Scripture and the Fathers apply these prophecies to the crucifixion--not to any penal condemnation in hell] expressions which intimate, that, like a sponsor and surety for the guilty, and, as it were, subjected to condemnation, he undertook and paid all the penalties which must have been exacted from them, the only exception being, that the pains of death could not hold him. Hence there is nothing strange in its being said that he descended to hell, seeing he endured the death which is inflicted on the wicked by an angry God. It is frivolous and ridiculous to object that in this way the order is perverted, it being absurd that an event which preceded burial should be placed after it. But after explaining what Christ endured in the sight of man, the Creed appropriately adds the invisible and incomprehensible judgement [ [so the cross as visible judgment was not enough. Christ suffered in hell...] which he endured before God, to teach us that not only was the body of Christ given up as the price of redemption, but that there was a greater and more excellent price – that he bore in his soul the tortures of condemned and ruined man. [ [So after suffering in the body on the cross, Christ's soul suffered tortures of the condemned in hell.]
What do we make of this? Essentially, Calvin’s doctrine of penal substitution is the problem (something Catholicism rejects, by the way). If we understand atonement as “substitution,” we run into the error that Calvin has committed. Since sinners deserve both physical death and spiritual torment in hell we should also expect that Christ as our redeemer must also experience both physical death and hell. This logic only makes sense–except that it contradicts everything said in the New Testament about Christ’s once-for-all sacrifice. The descent into hell was not punitive in anyway, but rather triumphant as described by the Apostles and illustrated in thousands of churches, both East and West (see picture below).
This descent into Hell as Christ’s victory corresponds to the teaching of our first Pope Saint Peter: Christ “proclaimed the Gospel even to the dead” (εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ νεκροῖς εὐηγγελίσθη, 1 Pet 4:6). Jesus wasn’t burning in the flames! He was dashing the gates of Hell, proclaiming His victory, and delivering the righteous of the Old Testament! That’s the holy Catholic and Apostolic Faith in all its beauty.
The “penal substitution” theory of the atonement is patently false. Christ died for us, but it wasn’t a simple swap. Christ uses the language of participation. We are to be “in Him” and we are to also carry the cross. Christ doesn’t take up the cross so that we don’t have to take up the cross. He repeatedly calls us to carry the cross. Our lives are to become “cruciform.” The New Testament constantly calls us to suffer in the likeness of Christ. Again, it’s not a clean exchange. It’s not: “Jesus suffers so that we don’t have to.” Rather we participate in His redemption. This is also the language of Saint Paul:
For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake (Phil 1:29).
Now I rejoice in my sufferings for your sake, and in my flesh I complete what is lacking in Christ’s afflictions for the sake of his body, that is, the Church (Col 1:24).
I would challenge all Reformed readers to slowly flip through the epistles of Paul and note the occurance of “in Him” and “in Christ”. Better yet, use BibleWorks or another Bible program and run a search. You will quickly see that “in Him” and “in Christ” is the universal soteriological category for Saint Paul–not justification or regeneration.
According to Catholic Christianity, Christian salvation involves the vindication of Christ’s unjust death on the cross. God does not “hate” His Son. This is impossible. God does not “turn away” from His Son. Luther introduced this false tension and it has led to Calvin’s grievous heresy. Saint Paul speaks of “overcoming death” as the true victory of Christ – not His being the whipping boy of the Father.
I should stop there and open up the comments:
I’m fascinated by your Christian charity.
Are you forgetting that we've dealt with each other before??? For some of you, your posts drip with sarcasm...And then you keep repeating the same things over and over when you have been shown with scripture over and over that you're wrong...
Jesus had broathers and sisters...Scripture says so...Jesus and others called non relatives brethren...Jesus called his relatives cousins...The OT talks about Jesus' mother's children...
And you keep repeating the same old lame argument that brothers and sisters means brethren...Cousins means brothers and sisters blah, blah, blah...And I say that with love and charity...
I don't care if you teach that Peter wore Kevin Klein boxers as long as you don't publicly try to distort the word of God to prove it's true...
I make no apology for defending God's word...
Luk 11:28 But he said, Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.
Sure Mary was blessed...But yea rather is PugetSoundSoldier blessed...Why don't we hear you saying stuff like that??? That's what Jesus said...
That I agree with!
***You demand freedom to interpret Scripture as you see fit, but then you deny it to those who don’t come to your own conclusions. You can’t do that. If you want the freedom to disagree with Rome, you have to give me the freedom to agree. That’s what freedom is.***
The basic tenets of Calvinism:
War is Peace, Freedom is Slavery, and Ignorance is Strength. Calvin got most things backward; his ideas of freedom are included.
***I know, I was being sarcastic when I wrote that.***
Many of our unlettered friends wouldn’t know sarcasm if it painted itself purple and danced naked on a harpsichord singing “Sarcastic Posts are Here Again”.
Okay, let’s take Scott out of the picture. There was Luther that was a monk...
Such arguments are utterly without merit. Neither Luther nor Scott prove a thing. If you converted to Scientology, would that then prove Scientology? No. We have no idea from any individual change, what is implied. But, once again it the Scripture is not used to demonstrate truth...just people.
We harken to the Scripture as the evidence of truth. Rome departs from that message. QED...Rome has departed the Gospel.
You still cannot find the wafers and wine magically changing into body and blood in John 6 (or anywhere else for that matter). But, Rome has its hooks in many sheeple that need the big organization to “prove” something to them. Jesus said, narrow is the gate and few there are that find it. Is the Catholic church big? Hmmmm.
Already been pointed out by who(m), your religion??? So what???
More importantly, it's been pointed out by Jesus that at the time of the Crucifixion Jesus' brothers were UN-BELIEVERS...So Jesus wasn't going to leave the care of His mother to unbelievers...Whether they were relatives or not...
Petronski, I'd send you a bible if I thought you'd read it...
***You still cannot find the wafers and wine magically changing into body and blood in John 6 (or anywhere else for that matter). ***
You may wish to reread Paul on that, since the children of the Reformation seem to have demoted the Gospels to second class status. I will use quotes from the St. Jerome Bible, rather than the NAB here:1 Corinthians 10:14-22
14 Therefore, my beloved, flee from idolatry. 15 I speak as to wise men; judge for yourselves what I say. 16 The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ? The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ? 17 For we, though many, are one bread and one body; for we all partake of that one bread. 18 Observe Israel after the flesh: Are not those who eat of the sacrifices partakers of the altar? 19 What am I saying then? That an idol is anything, or what is offered to idols is anything? 20 Rather, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to demons and not to God, and I do not want you to have fellowship with demons. 21 You cannot drink the cup of the Lord and the cup of demons; you cannot partake of the Lord’s table and of the table of demons. 22 Or do we provoke the Lord to jealousy? Are we stronger than He?
1 Corinthians 11:17-34
17 Now in giving these instructions I do not praise you, since you come together not for the better but for the worse. 18 For first of all, when you come together as a church, I hear that there are divisions among you, and in part I believe it. 19 For there must also be factions among you, that those who are approved may be recognized among you. 20 Therefore when you come together in one place, it is not to eat the Lord’s Supper. 21 For in eating, each one takes his own supper ahead of others; and one is hungry and another is drunk. 22 What! Do you not have houses to eat and drink in? Or do you despise the church of God and shame those who have nothing? What shall I say to you? Shall I praise you in this? I do not praise you.
23 For I received from the Lord that which I also delivered to you: that the Lord Jesus on the same night in which He was betrayed took bread; 24 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, “Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me.” 25 In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me.” 26 For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord’s death till He comes.
27 Therefore whoever eats this bread or drinks this cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord. 28 But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For he who eats and drinks in an unworthy manner eats and drinks judgment to himself, not discerning the Lord’s body. 30 For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep. 31 For if we would judge ourselves, we would not be judged. 32 But when we are judged, we are chastened by the Lord, that we may not be condemned with the world.
33 Therefore, my brethren, when you come together to eat, wait for one another. 34 But if anyone is hungry, let him eat at home, lest you come together for judgment. And the rest I will set in order when I come.
If you will not listen to Jesus, perhaps you will listen to Paul.
***We harken to the Scripture as the evidence of truth. Rome departs from that message. QED...Rome has departed the Gospel.***
I give you Scripture - Paul as well as Jesus. Perhaps it is the practices of the Reformed that have strayed. Something rather interesting I found out this afternoon: I looked up the nearest 10 Presbyterian churches to where I reside and found out about their pastors. I also found the General Presbyter.
General Presbyter - Priestess.
Male Pastor - 3
Male Paster Priestess coPastor - 2
Priestess Pastor - 3
Not listed - 2
We have a bunch of wanna be priestesses agitating for ordination, but we don’t make them priestesses and we don’t put them in charge of a church or of a diocese. We also have no bishopesses.
What we do have is the Deposit of Faith handed down to us through the Apostles and Church Fathers from Jesus Christ. We do not depart from Scripture - we were the ones who preserved it, chose the eventual NT (and confirmed the Septuagint of Jesus and the Apostles) and gave it to the world.
Possessing one of the textbooks of the great teaching institution of God without instruction in how to understand it is like trying to understand Superstring Theory without going through the rigours of understanding fundamentals such as addition and subtraction.
More of the myopic, self-serving line from Rome.
At the risk of sounding like a broken record,
I Cor. 11:24 “...this do in remembrance of Me.”
Now, where again is the magical change to the ACTUAL BODY and ACTUAL BLOOD? This is a memorial, a reminder. At least that is what the words mean, even in Koine Greek. But, that has never stopped Rome, has it?
And, no offense to the locals, but after the pornocrasy of the 1200s where the rapacious popes and monks ravaged the nuns and needed a screen between the confessors and the aggressors, the Catholic church is hardly one to point fingers about weird people. But, certainly, if any group claiming the name of Christ adds a women as the head teacher, we have absolute, clear testimony from THE SCRIPTURES that this is improper. Shame on them. They, like Rome, have departed from the Gospel.
And the Scriptures were well established long before pope tall-hat showed up. Read the history books that are not published by Rome. Do they let you do that?
***More of the myopic, self-serving line from Rome.***
We didn’t start it. Jesus did.
1 Corinthians 10:The cup of blessing that we bless, is it not a participation in the blood of Christ? The bread that we break, is it not a participation in the body of Christ?
17
Because the loaf of bread is one, we, though many, are one body, for we all partake of the one loaf.
18
Look at Israel according to the flesh; are not those who eat the sacrifices participants in the altar?
19
So what am I saying? That meat sacrificed to idols is anything? Or that an idol is anything?
Important here: Cup - participation in the blood of Christ.
Bread - participation in the body of Christ.
Meat - to be sacrificed
Notice that we have the act of sacrifice. What is sacrificed? Real meat. So, we participate in the blood of Christ and the Body of Christ with the sacrifice of meat (which IS Christ). These are not dissociated, but part of the same idea.
1 Corinthians 11:
23
11 For I received from the Lord what I also handed on to you, that the Lord Jesus, on the night he was handed over, took bread,
24
and, after he had given thanks, broke it and said, “This is my body that is for you. Do this in remembrance of me.”
25
In the same way also the cup, after supper, saying, “This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me.”
26
For as often as you eat this bread and drink the cup, you proclaim the death of the Lord until he comes.
27
Therefore whoever eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord unworthily will have to answer for the body and blood of the Lord. 12
28
A person should examine himself, 13 and so eat the bread and drink the cup.
29
For anyone who eats and drinks without discerning the body, eats and drinks judgment 14 on himself.
This My Body and this is My Blood. Anyone eats and drinks WITHOUT DISCERNING THE BODY, eats and drinks judgement on himself.
Real meat and real blood that Jesus says exists when eating and drinking the consecrated bread and wine.
The children of the Reformation are those whom Jesus referred to in John 6.
51
I am the living bread that came down from heaven; whoever eats this bread will live forever; and the bread that I will give is my flesh for the life of the world.”
52
The Jews quarreled among themselves, saying, “How can this man give us (his) flesh to eat?”
53
Jesus said to them, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you do not have life within you.
54
Whoever eats 19 my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him on the last day.
55
For my flesh is true food, and my blood is true drink.
56
Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me and I in him.
57
Just as the living Father sent me and I have life because of the Father, so also the one who feeds on me will have life because of me.
58
This is the bread that came down from heaven. Unlike your ancestors who ate and still died, whoever eats this bread will live forever.”
59
These things he said while teaching in the synagogue in Capernaum.
60
20 Then many of his disciples who were listening said, “This saying is hard; who can accept it?”
61
Since Jesus knew that his disciples were murmuring about this, he said to them, “Does this shock you?
62
What if you were to see the Son of Man ascending to where he was before? 21
63
It is the spirit that gives life, while the flesh 22 is of no avail. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and life.
64
But there are some of you who do not believe.” Jesus knew from the beginning the ones who would not believe and the one who would betray him.
65
And he said, “For this reason I have told you that no one can come to me unless it is granted him by my Father.”
66
As a result of this, many (of) his disciples returned to their former way of life and no longer accompanied him.
If you do not believe in the Eucharist as the real Body and Blood of Christ, you do not accompany Him. The Jews had a strong revulsion towards cannibalism and therefore a reaction such as this towards Jesus could only have been provoked by an understanding of real cannibalism.
If you would, don’t cherry pick a portion of verse that does not refer to proofs, and claim that since that portion does not refer to proofs, there is no proof.
I wouldn't want one of your redacted Bibles, I have my own.
***And, no offense to the locals, but after the pornocrasy of the 1200s where the rapacious popes and monks ravaged the nuns and needed a screen between the confessors and the aggressors, the Catholic church is hardly one to point fingers about weird people. ***
There is a difference between weird people and unChristian doctrine. If one has bad people and Christian doctrine, the Church will stand. If one has weird people and unChristian doctrine, that church will not stand. History records the rise and fall of many churches. Recent history over the last 200 years is particularly fascinating. Look at the completely delusion at the fringes of Christendom. There are many Pentecostal streams right now that believe in magic and in occult mysticism that rival Santaria in scope and effect.
The doctrines on the Sacraments are only some of the examples where the Church stands firm on Scripture and the children of the Reformation fall away.
***And the Scriptures were well established long before pope tall-hat showed up***
I don’t know who pope tall-hat is. But the Church selected the NT Scriptures more than three centuries after Jesus Ascended and took many decades to finally agree. If you tell me who pope tall-hat is, I can find out if your statement is factual.
***Read the history books that are not published by Rome.***
I have read many; do you have any in particular you’d recommend?
***Do they let you do that?***
Who are they?
Play this out, Mark...
Jesus is sitting there handing them his real Body & Real Blood? You are joking right? Was it from his arm or his leg?
This is symbolism, the same way John the Baptist says, “Behold the Lamb of God.” Jesus was not wearing a sheep suit or does Rome believe that, too. There was no real “door” entered and there is no real “body and blood” eaten. It was to “remember” Him, not crucify Him, again.
But, the cult has hijacked a perfectly understandable picture and created a slavish, works-oriented superstition run by its wizards. Rome trumps up a blasphemous ritual that chains the sheeple to the tall hats and bathrobes. Nowhere does it say, the wafers and wine becomes His body and blood. But, Rome needs the people to run to them to be rescued, rather than look to their Savior. Their condemnation is appropriate.
I’m at the office now. but I’ll gather a list and get back to you. It will disappoint Rome to find out you don’t know who “they” are.
LOL. Hi, Iscool.
Looks to me like he spent a couple of days there, but that could just be my quick reading of it.
NO man is infallible, not even the Pope. We’re all human and we all err.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.