Did Calvin Hold to Jesus Having a Spiritual Death?

[timfost]

Also, Heidelberg:

"44. Why is it added: “He descended into hell”? That in my greatest temptations I may be assured that Christ my Lord, by His inexpressible anguish, pains, and terrors, which He suffered in His soul on the cross and before, has redeemed me from the anguish and torment of hell. 1"

[1] Isa. 53: 10; Matt. 27: 46; *Ps. 18: 5; 116: 3.

 

[Dachaser]

Here is a discussion from the recent past on this passage. I hope you find it helpful.

https://puritanboard.com/threads/exegetical-help-on-1-Peter-3-18-22.89728/#post-1105571

Very helpful, as however one understands that passage to be meaning, cannot be that Jesus literally had to go to hell in order to somehow complete His sufferings, or else His "it is accomplished", meant not really.

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

First, note that Calvin is expounding the Apostles' Creed. The words, "He descended into hell," are not Calvin's words, but the Creed' s.

Second, he explains the words as describing Christ's spiritual torments on the cross, not as him going to the place of the damned. Christ's hell was the wrath of God poured out on him on the cross.

Seems to disagree with the catechism.

Q. 50. Wherein consisted Christ's humiliation after his death?

A. Christ's humiliation after his death consisted in his being buried, and continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power of death till the third day; which hath been otherwise expressed in these words, He descended into hell.

The catechism notes it to be an expression describing the torment Our Lord underwent, not a literal statement that He actually went to Hell.

 

[Pergamum]

The early church affirmed the harrowing of hell. We can re-interpet the Apostles' Creed and try to correct it according to our understanding, but I believe the original church audience that first heard it and began to recite it would have actually believed that, yes, Christ did descend into hell.

Cyril of Alexandria, “When the gatekeepers of hell saw him, they fled; the bronze gates were broken open, and the iron chains were undone” (Ancient Commentary on Scripture 11.107).

Melito of Sardis, late second century:
“It is I,” says Christ,
“I am he who destroys death,
and triumphs over the enemy,
and crushes Hades,
and binds the strong man,
and bears humanity off to the heavenly heights.”
(On Pascha 102)


He that was taken by death has annihilated it!
He descended into Hades and took Hades captive!
He embittered it when it tasted His flesh! And anticipating this, Isaiah exclaimed: “Hades was embittered when it encountered Thee in the lower regions“.
It was embittered, for it was abolished!
It was embittered, for it was mocked!
It was embittered, for it was purged!
It was embittered, for it was despoiled!
It was embittered, for it was bound in chains!
It took a body and came upon God!
It took earth and encountered Ηeaven!
It took what it saw, but crumbled before what can not seen!
---- (St. John Chrysostom, Paschal Homily)


"Luther, especially in a sermon delivered 1533 at Torgau, taught in accordance with the Scriptures that Christ the God-man,body and soul, descended into hell as Victor over Satan and his host.With special reference to Ps. 16, 10 and Acts 2, 24. 27, Luther explained: After His burial the whole person of Christ, the God-man, descended into hell, conquered the devil, and destroyed the power of hell and Satan. The mode and manner, however, in which this was done can no more be comprehended by human reason than His sitting at the right hand of the Father, and must therefore not be investigated, but believed and accepted in simple faith." (The Book of Concord
Historical Introductions to the Lutheran Confessions, F. Bente).

The Summa covers this topic fairly extensively: http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4052.htm


I am not defending the doctrine necessarily, only asserting that the Reformation-era creeds often do not honestly represent the original intent of the Creed, for they re-invent a meaning for it not held by the original audience that first would have recited it. Maybe the did not want to say outright that the creed was wrong and still wanted to respect it and so they tweaked the meaning a bit to make it preferable to their tastes.

 

[Cymro]

Christ did not descend into hell but into the grave. Neither did he preach to the spirits in prison or hell, which seems Romish to me. It was by the Spirit (1Pet 3:19) that he preached through Noah, the preacher of righteousness, to those who were disobedient while the Ark was preparing. Those who were dead in trespasses and sins as (1Pet4:6) reveals.

 

[chuckd]

The catechism notes it to be an expression describing the torment Our Lord underwent, not a literal statement that He actually went to Hell.

I was responding to Calvin: he explains the words as describing Christ's spiritual torments on the cross.

Catechism: after his death consisted in his being buried, and continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power of death till the third day.

Calvin and WLC Q50 disagree. For Calvin, it was apparently the torments of the cross. The catechism, it was the state of being dead: body and soul separated.

 

[Dachaser]

I was responding to Calvin: he explains the words as describing Christ's spiritual torments on the cross.

Catechism: after his death consisted in his being buried, and continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power of death till the third day.

Calvin and WLC Q50 disagree. For Calvin, it was apparently the torments of the cross. The catechism, it was the state of being dead: body and soul separated.

Calvin would seem to have the better understanding of this issue here.

 

[Dachaser]

The catechism notes it to be an expression describing the torment Our Lord underwent, not a literal statement that He actually went to Hell.

The description would be then as to how He experienced a sense of hell on the Cross by separation from the father and taking on the wrath of God as the Sin Bearer?

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

I was responding to Calvin: he explains the words as describing Christ's spiritual torments on the cross.

Catechism: after his death consisted in his being buried, and continuing in the state of the dead, and under the power of death till the third day.

Calvin and WLC Q50 disagree. For Calvin, it was apparently the torments of the cross. The catechism, it was the state of being dead: body and soul separated.

The WLC #50 is particularly focused upon Our Lord's humiliation after His death. Hence, the answer given is appropriate for the question asked. The descent into hell phrase speaks to the power of death that was vanquished by Christ's active and passive obedience. I am at a loss to find anything from Calvin on the matter that would suggest he would disagree with such an answer related to "after His death" made many years after Calvin's own death.

Calvin would seem to have the better understanding of this issue here.

Why? The question from the WLC is asking about His humiliation after Christ's death, not beforehand, which is the primary focus of what Calvin has written about in the Institutes.

Apples and oranges here.

 

[Dachaser]

The WLC #50 is particularly focused upon Our Lord's humiliation after His death. Hence, the answer given is appropriate for the question asked. The descent into hell phrase speaks to the power of death that was vanquished by Christ's active and passive obedience. I am at a loss to find anything from Calvin on the matter that would suggest he would disagree with such an answer related to "after His death" made many years after Calvin's own death.


Why? The question from the WLC is asking about His humiliation after Christ's death, not beforehand, which is the primary focus of what Calvin has written about in the Institutes.

Apples and oranges here.

So Calvin was addressing the aspect of Jesus facing "hell" while on the Cross as the Sin Bearer, while the Confession is related to after that experience, when He went to hades and was raised again?

 

[RamistThomist]

Many of the Fathers believed in the "Harrowing of Hell," where Jesus went to "Hades" and defeated demons and rescued the OT saints.

 

[Dachaser]

Many of the Fathers believed in the "Harrowing of Hell," where Jesus went to "Hades" and defeated demons and rescued the OT saints.

Would that be the passage suggesting that when Jesus arose, He took out from there the saved with Him now back to heaven?

 

[chuckd]

The WLC #50 is particularly focused upon Our Lord's humiliation after His death. Hence, the answer given is appropriate for the question asked. The descent into hell phrase speaks to the power of death that was vanquished by Christ's active and passive obedience. I am at a loss to find anything from Calvin on the matter that would suggest he would disagree with such an answer related to "after His death" made many years after Calvin's own death.

Good point!

Although the creed's chronology doesn't make sense:
was crucified, died and was buried.
He descended into hell.
On the third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven

It seems to me "He descended into hell" is what happened after he was buried like "He ascended into heaven" is what happened after he rose again "from the dead."

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

Good point!

Although the creed's chronology doesn't make sense:
was crucified, died and was buried.
He descended into hell.
On the third day He rose again from the dead.
He ascended into heaven

It seems to me "He descended into hell" is what happened after he was buried like "He ascended into heaven" is what happened after he rose again "from the dead."

The chronology makes sense once one takes "descended into hell" to mean here coming under "the power of death" (death's dominion over Him), which is how the descent clause is often taken to mean.

For example:

2. As Christ died, and was buried; so he continued under the power of death till the third day. This the apostle calls “Death's having dominion over him'' and it must be reckoned a part of his humiliation as truly as the act of dying.

For though his soul enjoyed the bliss and happiness of heaven immediately after his death, as he tells the penitent thief that “that day he should be with him in paradise” ; yet, as it was, when separate, in a state of imperfection, and had a natural desire and hope of reunion with the body, there were some degrees of perfect blessedness of which it was not then possessed.

Moreover, so long as he continued under the power of death, he was not fully discharged by the justice of God. The work of satisfaction was not completed till he was declared to be the Son of God with power, and to have fully conquered death and hell by his resurrection from the dead. His continuing under the power of death till the third day, therefore, was a part of his humiliation. Besides, his body, while remaining a prisoner in the grave, could not actively bring that glory to God which it did before, or would do after its resurrection; and it was at that time incapable of the heavenly blessedness, and, in particular, of its being so glorious a body as now it is.”​

Source: Thomas Ridgeley, Commentary on the Larger Catechism (Previously titled: A Body of Divinity: Wherein the Doctrines of the Christian Religion are Explained and Defended, Being the Substance of Several Lectures on the Assembly's Larger Catechism), Volume I, pp. 602-606, for a more complete discussion. Available here: http://digitalpuritan.net/thomas-ridgley/

 

[Ask Mr. Religion]

So Calvin was addressing the aspect of Jesus facing "hell" while on the Cross as the Sin Bearer, while the Confession is related to after that experience, when He went to hades and was raised again?

Yes and no.

Calvin was treating the Apostle's Creed and made the case that the "descent into Hell" the Creed speaks to relates primarily what Our Lord underwent upon the Cross.

The altar upon which His sacrifice was made, His divinity, made is such that Jesus was able to endure the full wrath of God against sin, upon the Cross and afterwards, propitiating that wrath for all those given to Our Lord (John 6:37; John 6:39; John 10:29; John 17:11-12; John 17:9; John 17:22; John 18:9), a great multitude no man can number.

The Westminster Larger Catechism #50 is merely asking a direct question about the Lord's humiliation after his death. WLC #46-49 adequately cover Our Lord's humiliation prior to His death. So to be accurate, the WLC provides sufficient instruction on the whole matter of Our Lord's humiliation, and cannot be said to be only focused upon "after that experience...".

 

[Dachaser]

Yes and no.

Calvin was treating the Apostle's Creed and made the case that the "descent into Hell" the Creed speaks to relates primarily what Our Lord underwent upon the Cross.

The altar upon which His sacrifice was made, His divinity, made is such that Jesus was able to endure the full wrath of God against sin, upon the Cross and afterwards, propitiating that wrath for all those given to Our Lord (John 6:37; John 6:39; John 10:29; John 17:11-12; John 17:9; John 17:22; John 18:9), a great multitude no man can number.

The Westminster Larger Catechism #50 is merely asking a direct question about the Lord's humiliation after his death. WLC #46-49 adequately cover Our Lord's humiliation prior to His death. So to be accurate, the WLC provides sufficient instruction on the whole matter of Our Lord's humiliation, and cannot be said to be only focused upon "after that experience...".

The WLC would then be covering the entire range of what Jesus was enduring then.