Biblical grounds for the Harrowing of Hell?

[JDGaney]

I saw a fundamentalist post something on YouTube about how the harrowing of hell is unbiblical because Jesus spoke to both Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration. What do you guys think of this?

 

[Mystophilus]

I saw a fundamentalist post something on YouTube about how the harrowing of hell is unbiblical because Jesus spoke to both Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration. What do you guys think of this?

Wait, their logic is that Moses and Elijah were there, and therefore no one else was in Hades? That makes no sense.

 

[SonCatcher]

Uh-huh. Also, Samuel appeared to Saul. What’s that have to do with “where” their souls resided at the time?

 

[Julia_Mae]

I saw a fundamentalist post something on YouTube about how the harrowing of hell is unbiblical because Jesus spoke to both Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration. What do you guys think of this?

There’s no Scripture that says Jesus ever went to hell. Jesus descended to the dead - the whole of the afterlife was thought to be underground, “hades” referred to all of it. So Jesus would have “descended” to Purgatory as well, the way the people conceived of things at that time.

 

[bitznbitez]

I saw a fundamentalist post something on YouTube about how the harrowing of hell is unbiblical because Jesus spoke to both Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration. What do you guys think of this?

I focused on this in a study I did a while back. The problem starts with not understanding where the patriarchs went when they died. Until Christ the way to heaven was not open. If the way to heaven was open for the patriarchs there was no need for Christ to die.

The difference of opinion is all in the translating. What Douay rendered Hell ( consistent with Latin before it and Hades in Greek ) protestant versions like Geneva rendered Grave. KJV split the difference. Modern versions like NIV have completely gotten rid of Hell in the OT again.

I wrote up an example of this in relation purely to the prayer of Hannah at the temple a few months ago but its far broader in impact when one looks at all the examples. This same concept if you look at say Genesis 42:38 or 44:29 is probably stronger than what I focused on in Hannahs prayer. Jacob saying that his grey hairs would go down to hell in sorrow versus Jacob saying his grey hairs would go down to the grave in sorrow.

The word change is what creates the gulf.

The notion that the patriarchs and others went to hell temporarily ( or alternate names such as the limbo of the fathers, the bosom of abraham, or even purgatory ) until the time of Christ, when they were taken out of hell to heaven, is completely scriptural.

How the protestant view that the above teaching is not biblical emerged and obtains support is rather fascinating.

…

By changing the word hell to grave the meaning of scripture regarding the afterlife materially changed. If the traditional manner of understanding had been maintained it would have had no impact. But along with changing the rendering to remove hell the use of traditional understand was declared to be incorrect. Thus freed from the mooring of how it was always understood the meaning was now at the mercy of the translators and gave rise to the ability to charge the traditional teaching was “Not in the Bible” to which I would simply add “Not in the Bible ANYMORE…”

…

beyond-m42.net/blog/article/757/

The definition/meaning of a word is tradition. Redefining words/changing definition is how this gulf has come to exist.

 

[Mystophilus]

I saw a fundamentalist post something on YouTube about how the harrowing of hell is unbiblical because Jesus spoke to both Moses and Elijah at the transfiguration. What do you guys think of this?

The biblical basis of the belief, BTW, is Ephesians 4:9, “Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?”. That expression “into the lower parts of the earth” (εις τα κατωτερα μερη της γης), which is where Greeks and Jews alike had located the realm of the dead, is an odd one to explain pretty much any other way than how Chrysostom does:

whereas from His ascending, he implies His descent, and by the lower parts of the earth, he means death, according to the notions of men; as Jacob also said, Then shall you bring down my gray hairs with sorrow to the grave. (Genesis 32:48) And again as it is in the Psalm, Lest I become like them that go down into the pit (Psalm 143:7), that is like the dead. Why does he descant upon this region here? And of what captivity does he speak? Of that of the devil; for He took the tyrant captive, the devil, I mean, and death, and the curse, and sin. Behold His spoils and His trophies.