HELL

(Anglo-Saxon and Icelandic Hele , Hela , a “cavern;” “concealed place;” “mansion of the dead.”) Two entirely different words in the original language of the New Testament are rendered in our version by the single word “hell.” The first of these is Hades , which occurs eleven times in the New Testament, and in every case but one is translated “hell.” Now Hades is never used to denote the place of final torment, the regions of the damned; but signifies “the place of departed spirits,” whether good or bad,—the place where they are kept until the day of judgment, when they shall be re-united to their bodies, and go each to his appointed destiny. The other word, Gehenna , signifies the place of torment,—the eternal abode of the wicked. At the time when our translation was made, and the Prayer Book compiled, the English word “hell” had a more extensive meaning than it has at present. It originally signified to cover over or conceal ; and it is still used in this sense in several parts of England, where, for example, to cover a church or a house with a roof is to hell the building, and the person by whom it is done is called a hellier . But the word also denoted the place of future misery, and is accordingly used in that sense in the New Testament, as the translation of Gehenna ; and in consequence of the changes which our language has experienced during the last 200 years, it is now restricted to this particular meaning. (See Gehenna .) Bearing in mind, then, that Hades was translated by the word “hell,” for want of another more exactly corresponding with the original, the reader will perceive that the article in the Creed, “He descended into hell,” does not refer to the place of final misery; but to that general receptacle of all departed human souls, both penitent and impenitent, where they are reserved in a state of comparative enjoyment or misery, to wait the morning of the resurrection, when their bodies being united to their souls, they will be advanced to complete felicity or woe, in heaven or hell. One great use of the system of catechising, as enjoined by the Church, is the opportunity it affords of inculcating upon the people such distinctions as these. It was nece ary that our Lord’s death should be attended with all those circumstances which mark the death of men. Christ was po e ed of a human nature, both body and soul, besides his Divinity. The body of man at death sinks to the grave; and the soul goes to Hades , or the place of departed spirits. In like manner the body of our Lord was laid in the tomb, but his soul went to the general repository of human disembodied spirits, “the lower parts of the earth,” (Ps. xvi. 10; Eph. iv. 9, with Ps. lxiii. 9, and Isa. v. 14,) Hades, the place of separated souls, not Gehenna, the place of condemnation; because if it relate to the place of either bli or misery, it must be the former, in consistence with the Lord’s promise to the penitent thief. (Luke xxiii. 43.) Five different opinions have been entertained on this subject. First, that the word “descended” is to be taken metaphorically; implying only the efficacy of Christ’s death as to the souls departed. But this seems refuted by the pa age, “Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell,” (Ps. xvi. 10,) whereas the efficacy of our Lord’s death still continues. Secondly, that the descent into hell signifies the suffering the torments of the damned; and this in the stead of those who otherwise must have endured them. But it is not to be believed that our Lord could suffer from the “worm that never dieth”—the remorse of conscience, and a sense of the continuance and consequences of the displeasure of God , and consequent despair; or that he who overcame the powers of hell could suffer under their vengeance. Nor, again, can he, in this article, be said by a metaphor to have felt the torments of hell, by this meaning only the greatest torments, because all that he felt which we know of, was antecedent to his death, and not afterwards. The torments of hell then cannot be here meant literally, because not supported by truth, nor figuratively, because not applicable. Thirdly, that the word “soul” does in this pa age mean the body, and “hell” merely the grave; and the same words, both in Hebrew and Greek, as used respectively by the psalmist and the apostle, and translated the “soul,” do elsewhere in the Scriptures mean the “body.” As in Numb. vi. 6; Lev. xxi. 11; and xxii. 4; and more particularly, Numb. xix. 11, and 13. And Ains worth, whose translation is the most literal of any, so uses the word. And again, with respect to the word “hell;” in some pa ages it can mean nothing but the grave, and is so used by our translation, when Ains worth uses the word “hell,” as in Gen. xxxvii. 35, and xlii. 38. This mode of explication too, connected with the following article, will fulfil the prophecy, “Thou shalt not leave my soul (body) in hell” (the grave). Fourthly, that by the “soul” may be understood the nobler part distinguished from the body; or the whole person, both soul and body; or the living soul distinguished from the immortal spirit. And by “hell,” no place whatever, but merely the condition of men in death. But this explanation involves an entirely novel idea as to Hades, which was always understood as some place where the souls of men entered, whether this is in the earth, or out of it, or in whatever unknown part; and from which the Greeks considered those to be excluded who came to a premature death, or whose bodies lay unburied. And in addition, the descent into hell thus explained would be tautologous, meaning nothing more than the being dead, which the preceding article had declared. Fifthly, and this is apparently the best explanation, as it was always the opinion entertained by the Church—that the “soul” was the spirit, or rational part, of Christ , that which the Jews could “not kill,” and “hell,” a place distinguished equally from earth and from heaven. The pa age may then mean, “Thou shalt not suffer my soul,” when separated from the body, and carried to the place a igned, as other souls are, to continue there as theirs do, but shalt, after a short interval only, reunite it to my body. That this was an opinion general in the Church, is proved, not only by the direct testimony of the Fathers, but by their arguments on the subject in answer to heretics. They all fully agreed in a real descent of the soul of Christ into the place of souls departed; though they differed as to the persons whom he descended to visit, and the end for which he went. Some of them considered Hades, or “hell,” as the common receptacle of souls, both of the just and the unjust, and then thought that the soul of Christ went unto those only who had departed in the true faith and fear of God . But to this many could not agree, not thinking that Hades could ever, in Scripture, be taken for the place of happine . And as to the end, those who held the former opinion of the common receptacle, imagined that Christ went unto the faithful to di olve the power by which they were detained, and translate them into heaven. But to this change of place or condition many objected, conceiving that the souls of men shall not enter into heaven till after the general resurrection. Some there were who, conceiving that this place did not include the ble ed, imagined that the object of our Lord’s going into the place of torment, was to deliver some of the suffering souls, and translate them to a place of happine . That this was done by preaching the gospel to them, that they after death might have an opportunity of receiving him, and then pa with him from death to life. So that they all imagined that the soul of Christ descended into hell to preach the gospel to the spirits there, but differed as to whether it was to those who before believed, that they might now receive him; or to those who had before rejected him, that they might yet believe on him. But there seem insurmountable objections both to the opinion that he preached to the faithful, for they were not “disobedient,” (as “in the days of Noah,”) nor could they need a publication of the gospel after the death of Christ , by virtue of which they were accepted while they lived; and to that, that he preached to the wicked, for they were not proper objects, or likely to be persuaded. The effect too of the preaching may be denied. There is no repentance in the grave, nor any pa ing the “great gulf” of separation. Again, with respect to the faithful, it is not certain that their souls were in a place where Christ would descend; or that they are now in another and better place than they were at first; or that Christ did descend into such place for such purpose; or that such effect was produced at such a time. There is another opinion that has obtained, and perhaps more in our own Church, that Christ descended into hell to triumph over Satan and his powers in their own dominions, principally grounded on Col. ii. 11–15; Eph. iv. 8, 9. But these pa ages are not conclusive; and the argument seems inconsistent in those who object to the opinion, that the souls of the wicked have been released, or those of the saints removed. The sound conclusion as to the whole, and what our belief might be, is, perhaps, first, as to fact, that the soul of Christ , separated from his body by death, did go into the common place of departed spirits, in order that he might appear, both alive and dead, as perfect man. All that was nece ary for our redemption, by way of satisfaction, was effected on the cro . The exhibition of what was there merited, was effected by his resurrection; and between these, he satisfied the law of death. Secondly, as to the effect. By the descent of Christ into the regions of darkne , the souls of believers are kept from the torments which are there. As the grave and hell had no power over him, the “head,” so neither shall it have over “the members.” By his descent he freed us from all fear, by his resurrection and ascension he has secured our hope; and thus through “death, destroyed him that hath the power of death, that is, the devil.” As he “was delivered for our offences,” so was he “raised again for our justification.” (Rom. iv. 25.) If this had not taken place, our “faith” would have been “vain;” we should have been “yet in our sins,” (1 Cor. xv. 14, 17,) for as we are “buried with him in baptism, we are quickened together with him,” (Col. ii. 12, 13,) and “begotten again to a lively hope,” by his “resurrection from the dead;” if “by him we believe in God that raised him up from the dead,” (1 Pet. i. 3, 21,) and “walk in newne of life.” (Rom. vi. 4; viii. 11; 1 Cor. vi. 14; 2 Cor. iv. 14; Eph. i. 19, 20; Heb. xiii. 20.) Therefore, “on the third day, he rose again from the dead, a living body,” (Luke xxiv. 39; John xx. 20, 27,) “quickened by the spirit,” (1 Pet. iii. 18,) and raised by himself, (John x. 18; ii. 19,) as this was typified in Isaac, “received” again by his father, as “in (or for) a figure,” (Heb. xi. 19,) and by the waved sheaf, the dedicated “first-fruits of the harvest.” (Lev. xxiii. 10, 11.) This, too, on the third day—the “first day of the week,” the Christian “sabbath,” (Matt, xxviii. 1; xx. 19, (thenceforward called “the Lord’s day,” Rev. i. 10,) John xx. 26; Acts xx. 7; 1 Cor. xvi. 2,) according to the deliverance of his type Jonah. (Matt. xii. 39, 40.) As this was frequently predicted by himself, (Matt. xii. 39, 40, and xvi. 21; xvii. 9; John ii. 19, 21,) confirmed by his enemies, (Matt. xxvi. 61; xxvii. 63; Mark xv. 29,) and by the angel, (Matt. xxviii. 6, 7, 17,) and the truth of it proved also by the precautions of his enemies, (Matt, xxviii. 13–15,) by his showing himself to his disciples several times, and “many days,” (John xx. 19, 26; xxi. 14; Acts xiii. 31,) as to “witne es chosen before of God ,” (Acts x. 41,) appointed expre ly to bear testimony to this great truth, “unto the uttermost parts of the earth,” (Acts i. 8, 22; ii. 24, 31, 32; iii. 15; iv. 33; v. 32; x. 40; 1 Cor. xv. 15,) as was “also the Holy Ghost .” (Acts v. 32, and to others, 1 Cor. xv. 4–8.) Which truth, that “ God hath raised him from the dead,” is to be received by “all men” as an “a urance” that “ God will judge the world in righteousne by him.” (Acts xvii. 30–32.)