Article III: Of the going down of Christ into Hell. A recant

I am seeking ordination in the Anglican church and apart from all the vetting and checks they do, it also means I have to subscribe to a certain theological stance on a number of things. These are articulated in the 39 Articles, and while it seems today not all Anglican dioceses use them, the one I am does. I have been quite vocal in the past to people about the Articles and in particular the Third Article. The other theological articles  I am on board with, as they present a solid protestant and even Calvinistic position on God, Jesus, the Bible, salvation and the church - some of the practical ones seem a little annoying like having a prince call a church meeting (Article 21). So this post is a bit of a recant, a humbling of my opinion shifting. (I'm still open to another change of mind, and this post is perhaps more for my own thinking than for anyone else really).

Article 3 states:

As Christ died for us, and was buried, so also is it to be believed, that he went down into Hell.

There doesn't seem much wiggle room in this statement. It doesn't suggest that Jesus was in Hell on the cross, instead, it connected being buried as going down into Hell.

I should also say previously my thinking has been heavily influenced by Wayne Grudem. In his systematic, he goes to great length in explaining how the line in the Apostles Creed was added later and gives great detail on what 1 Peter 3 could mean, while funny enough giving a quite a simplistic reading of Luke 23. So I had to undo or challenge these ideas to come to my new position which William Griffith Thomas has recently influenced me. (In Defining Convictions and Decisive Commitments on this Article they quote Calvin and say he does a bit of sleight of hand by saying that Jesus was in Hell on the cross, which I thought wasn't very helpful.)

1 Peter 3:19 is not needed

I used to think this article was supported solely on the obscure verses in 1 Peter 3:19-22. This is a pretty obscure passage to build a key point of doctrine on. And any good hermeneutics generally work on the bases that we should let clearer passages govern harder ones, and really Luke 23:43 seems pretty clear, Jesus says: "Today you will be with me in paradise". 

It turns out this article originally was drafted in the 42 Articles with a reference to 1 Peter 3:19 but it was removed in the final. It had this extra sentence: 

The body laid in the sepulcher until the resurrection, but his Ghost departing from him was with the Ghosts that were in prison, or in Hell, and did preach to the same, as the place of St. Peter does testify.

I think this is probably a bit more problematic (by "ghost" they meant spirit) and leans a lot on 1 Peter, but upon revision this bit was removed, and I think we don't need this confusing verse in 1 Peter to say that Jesus went to Hell. William Griffith Thomas says in regards to 1 Peter 3 "as the passage was deliberately omitted from this Article in 1563, it is obvious that we have no right to use it here or in connection with the similar statement in the Creed".

Acts 2:27-31 and Psalm 16

William Griffith Thomas points out that Acts 2 and by extension Psalm 16 are "the only clear passages on this subject, and it will be noticed that it simple states the fact without giving any idea as to the meaning or purpose."

In Acts 2 Peter is giving the first Chrisitan sermon and is leaning on a whole bunch of Old Testament passages to show that Jesus is the Messiah. In one section he goes in to quote a bit of Psalm 16 saying:

This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him. David said about him:

“‘I saw the Lord always before me. Because he is at my right hand, I will not be shaken.
Therefore my heart is glad and my tongue rejoices; my body also will rest in hope, because you will not abandon me to the realm of the dead, you will not let your holy one see decay.
You have made known to me the paths of life; you will fill me with joy in your presence.’ (Acts 2:23-28)

Peter is clearly talking about Jesus here, saying He was crucified, died and raised from the dead. He then quotes Psalm 16, to be about Jesus who was not abandoned to the realm of the dead. 

Grudem suggests the "realm of the dead" can just mean the grave. I am not so sure. Peter's order of events to me suggests that Jesus died and before He was raised was rescued from the agony of death. This seems to be more active than just a body lying in a tomb. After Peter quotes Psalm 16 he goes on to say:

“Fellow Israelites, I can tell you confidently that the patriarch David died and was buried, and his tomb is here to this day. But he was a prophet and knew that God had promised him on oath that he would place one of his descendants on his throne. Seeing what was to come, he spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, that he was not abandoned to the realm of the dead, nor did his body see decay. God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of it. (Acts 2:29-32)

Peter points out that David is still dead, David hasn't come back to life, but was speaking about Jesus who "was not abandoned to the realm of the dead".

There is some comfort in the idea of Jesus' identification with people, that He took our punishment for us, and took it to the very end, not just death, not just God's wrath but also descending into Hell itself for us. His human nature experienced the full extent of what all humans apart from Christ will experience. Jesus satisfied every condition of fallen humanity and so those who are in Christ don't have to.

What about Luke 23:43?

It is all very nice to have a prophecy in Psalm 16 and Peter's explanation of it in Acts stating that Jesus was not abandoned in the realm of the dead (or "hades" (ESV, HCSB, NASB), or "hell" (KJV)), and Jesus identifying with humanity and their endurance of Hell, but what about Luke 23:43 which seems pretty straight forward:

Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”

I always thought this was a knockdown argument to squash this whole point. And I have used this argument, even recently with other ministers. "Today" seems to be pretty clear cut, however, I am not so sure anymore. Luke seems to use "today" in other places of his Gospel to not necessarily mean the 24 hour period in which the sun does its cycle.

"Today" in Luke 4:21

In Luke 4:21 Jesus says: “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.” in reference to this reading from Isaiah:

“The Spirit of the Lord is on me, because he has anointed me to proclaim good news to the poor.
He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to set the oppressed free, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.” (Luke 4:18-19)

In what sense was all of this fulfilled that day? Yes, the spirit was on Jesus who announced the good news. He was sent to proclaim freedom, recover sight and set people free. But was it only that day, or a continual idea, that with Jesus there is present salvation? Jesus didn't just fulfil this passage once when He read this text, but He was always on about its fulfilment, we haven't missed this chance either. "Today" in this sense is that Jesus is not "now and only now" but "a timeless 'now,' a reference to the immediate present when fulfilment is available and a life-changing decision can be made. Hope can become a reality “today.” (Darrell Bock, BECNT). "[T]his ‘today’ does not refer only to the past, so that salvation belongs to the past and not to the present. The ‘today’ of Jesus is still addressed to all readers of the Gospel and assures them that the era of salvation is present" (I. Howard Marshall, NIGTC).

"Today" in Luke 19:9

Likewise in Luke 19:9, Jesus tells everyone that: "Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham" in reference to Zacchaeus repenting of his cheating and giving half his stuff to the poor. Salvation is an immediate thing in Luke's Gospel (Joel B Green, NICNT). We don't have to split hairs on how Zacchaeus is saved before Jesus has died for his sins. Salvation is announced, and so by faith in Jesus and what He is going to do salvation can be assured. So while salvation wasn't actually achieved right then and there in Zacchaeus, it was still announced and can be trusted in by faith right then and there.

"Today" in Luke 23:43

So when we get to the cross and "today" - salvation is assured to the guy on the cross, that is absolutely true, in the same way it was for Zacchaeus and how Jesus fulfilled scripture in Luke 4. "Today" is used in a way "which signifies that the era of salvation has become a reality" (I. Howard Marshall, NIGTC. Marshall recognises the difficulty of this with Jesus' descent into Hades but doesn't resolve it.). In Luke's Gospel "today" is an ongoing time for salvation that is available for all.

"Ellis (1965–66) and Fitzmyer (1985: 1510) argue that σήμερον [today] is a reference to the immediate present rather than to the day of Jesus’ death, which is possible....that Jesus comes into messianic authority as a result of resurrection-ascension, so that the actual day of being with Jesus is a few days hence." (Darrell Bock, BECNT. Bock think "this is splitting hairs").

Wrapping up

All of this is to say that I think Luke 23:43 is not as clear cut as I previously thought. Luke loves the idea that salvation is available today for all people, in the same way that Mark loved the idea that the Kingdom of God was near. Both are wrapped up in the person of Jesus. Acts 2 now seems to be clearer in that Jesus fulfilled Psalm 16 and was not abandoned to the place of the dead (Hades/Hell) but instead went through it and came out the other side. It's what the Christians first preached in Jerusalem where Jesus was killed.

Throughout the New Testament, there is a participation idea, in that what Christ did His followers also participated with Him. When you are saved, you are brought from death to life, even when we are presently alive. You participate in Christ's death (Col 2:20) and also His resurrection where your life is safe (hidden) with Christ in heaven (Col 3:1-4). Why can't Jesus not only participate in human death and taking on God's wrath but also fully complete the cycle of participation and go to Hell too? 

"There is nothing in the fact of death, nothing in the consequence of death, which Christ has not endured for us: He was buried, He descended into Hades, the place of spirits" (Westcott, cited in William Griffith Thomas)

Both Zacchaeus and the guy on the cross get to be with Jesus in Paradise forever. While it is still "today" the same truth is for us - if we don't harden our hearts we too can enter God's rest (Heb 3:7-4:11). What better time to think about this on Good Friday?