The ambiguity continued into the Reformation period, when for example Luther interpreted the statement to refer to a literal visit by Christ to hell, while Calvin argued that it referenced Christ’s sufferings in this life and especially on the cross. The Puritans interpreted the descent clause as a reference to Christ continuing “under the power of death” for the three days before His resurrection (Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 50).
The Apostles’ Creed is one of three ecumenical creeds confessed by Western Christian churches. The others are the Nicene Creed (which resolved the Arian controversy and reaffirmed Christ’s full divinity) and the Athanasian Creed (which summarizes the biblical teaching on the Trinity and Christ’s two natures).
The Apostles’ Creed was not written by the apostles, though the Creed has been confessed by churches since shortly after the apostolic age. An early, briefer version of the Creed was used in 2nd century Roman churches, typically as a baptismal confession of faith. In those days it was often called the “Roman Creed” or “Roman Symbol,” but as the language of the Creed expanded and it began to be used more widely, it eventually picked up the name we use today. The first confirmed use of the title “Apostles’ Creed” appears in a letter written in A.D. 390 by Ambrose, who affirms that the early church recognized the Creed as a faithful summary of apostolic teaching. Indeed, most of Creed’s language can be traced directly to New Testament writings.
Besides its nascent Trinitarian focus, the Apostles’ Creed is structured around redemptive history. Starting with Creation, it moves to the birth of Jesus, His sufferings and death, His resurrection and exaltation, His future coming, the present age, and the age to come. Rather than stringing together a series of abstract theological propositions, the early Christians summarized and affirmed their core beliefs in the context of a theological history of the world, with Christ at the center of it all. There is something awesome about that, and it is no wonder the Creed has gained such an honored status in the church.
Question about the Creed
One complicating factor is that “He descended into hell” was not included in the earliest versions of the Creed. For example, the original “Roman Symbol” contained no mention of it. The descent clause was introduced later, possibly as late as the 4th century, and the reason this was even possible was because in the early centuries of the Christian church, the wording of the Creed was not precisely fixed. Most of the language was identical from region to region, but different churches used different versions, some a bit longer, some shorter. It was in this fluid context that “He descended into hell” first appeared, and the statement eventually gained wider and wider acceptance. It was not until A.D. 750 that the language became standardized in Western churches.
No doubt because it was introduced later, “He descended into hell” has always generated a certain level of confusion. Many have understood it to reference Christ’s supposed visit to the netherworld after His death to announce the Gospel and release the godly deceased from their temporary abode in Hades. Others saw primary reference to Christ remaining in a state of physical death for the three days preceding His resurrection. Augustine puzzled over the statement, at least regarding its implications for 1 Peter 3:19, and he did not attempt to answer the questions he raised. Aquinas responded to Augustine much later (he argued that Christ descended to hell and purgatory!), but that did not satisfy everyone, either. There remained a certain ambiguity about the exact meaning of “He descended into hell.”
The ambiguity continued into the Reformation period, when for example Luther interpreted the statement to refer to a literal visit by Christ to hell, while Calvin argued that it referenced Christ’s sufferings in this life and especially on the cross. The Puritans interpreted the descent clause as a reference to Christ continuing “under the power of death” for the three days before His resurrection (Westminster Larger Catechism Q. 50).
What Does the Bible Say?
Confusion about “He descended into hell” is frequently related to a misunderstanding of the term “hell.” According to the Bible, hell, aka the Lake of Fire, is the place of future bodily judgment of the wicked (Matthew 5:29-30; 10:28). The emphasis here is on futureand bodily, for as far as we know from the Scriptures, no one is presently in hell or has ever been to hell. Hell is an horrific, everlasting, post-Resurrection, post-2nd Coming judgment reserved for wicked humans and angels (Revelation 20:10, 14-15; Matthew 25:31-33, 41-46). Jesus certainly did not visit or suffer in this place after his death.
On the other hand, when some in the ancient church confessed that Christ “descended into hell,” the “hell” they had in mind was actually Hades, the temporary abode of the dead Jesus referenced in the story of Lazarus and the Rich Man (Luke 16:19-31). The Jewish conception of Hades — a two-compartment place of waiting during the intermediate state — is witnessed in this story. The righteous are said to be comforted in “Abraham’s bosom,” while the unrighteous suffer in flames. Hades is the place many Christians believe Jesus visited between His death and resurrection, supposedly to announce His victory over sin and to release the righteous dead from their temporary waiting place and bring them to Heaven.
The continental Reformed churches followed Calvin’s understanding that Christ’s descent into hell is a metaphorical reference to His sufferings on Earth. In other words, Christ’s descent speaks of His humiliation in becoming a man and the intense sufferings He experienced on Earth and especially on the cross. The Son of God came down from Heaven and was incarnated as the man Jesus to endure the wrath of God in our place – the just punishment for our sins – in order to secure our salvation. This understanding is summed up in the Heidelberg Catechism:
Q44: Why is it added: “He descended into hell”?
A: 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.
There is much biblical support to commend this understanding of the descent clause:
1) It is consistent with metaphorical references to hell and Hades we find in Scripture, such as Psalm 116:3: “The pains of death surrounded me, and the pangs of Sheol (Hades) laid hold of me.” Obviously hell is a literal place of suffering where the wicked will be consigned to eternal punishment, but the Bible does at times refer to the sufferings of hell in a figurative sense to denote extreme distress and anguish in this life, as in 1 Samuel 2:6.
2) It is consistent with Jesus doing battle with Satan and his legions during His public ministry (Matthew 4:1-11; Mark 3:27; 5:9), and also with Satan’s human followers, who accused Jesus, betrayed Him, insulted Him, beat Him, and hung Him on a tree to die a criminal’s death (John 6:70; 8:44; Luke 18:32; 22:3, 48, 63).
3) It is consistent with statements Christ made in Luke 23: “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (v. 43) and “Father, into Your hands I commit My spirit” (v. 46). While our Savior was suffering on the cross, He anticipated His arrival in Paradise that same day, immediately upon His death.
4) It is consistent with Christ’s statement, “It is finished!” (John 19:30). Christ had no need to make a supposed trip to Hades to release the godly deceased since their salvation was now secure because of His substitutionary death.
5) It is consistent with the Creed itself, for if “He descended into hell” refers only to Christ’s burial, then why restate this truth in metaphorical terms after the Creed had just affirmed it with literal language (“buried”)?
6) It is consistent with the experience of Jesus on the cross. During that time, a pervasive darkness fell over the land for a period of three hours (Luke 23:44-45). The Old Testament prophets taught that darkness is a symbol of God’s judgment, as in Isaiah (5:30; 13:9-11) and Joel (2:31; 3:14-16). Joel 2:31: “The sun will be turned to darkness and the moon to blood before the coming of the great and dreadful Day of the Lord.” Jesus also described hell as a place of “darkness” (Matthew 8:12; 22:13). Thus when darkness fell on the land while Jesus was on the cross, it was a sign from God that the Day of Judgment had come for His people. God’s terrible wrath and judgment against our sin and guilt was poured out in full measure upon Jesus during those hours. Jesus shouted from the cross that the Father had “forsaken” Him (Mark 15:34; Psalm 22:1), further evidence that He was experiencing the punishment of hell for our sins.
7) The interpretation preserved in the Heidelberg Catechism also resolves the greatest difficulty of all — the fact that the Scriptures nowhere teach that Jesus Christ visited Hades.
Some have argued that Christ descending into Hades is taught in 1 Peter 3:19 and 4:6, but those verses refer to Christ preaching “by the Spirit” (via Noah’s Spirit-directed preaching) to the disobedient spirits of the flood generation, those spirits who are *now* in prison (but were *not* imprisoned in the days of Noah).
Many have argued that Isaiah 61:1-2 teach that Jesus visited hell to fulfill the prophecy that Messiah would “proclaim liberty to the captives” and “set at liberty those who are oppressed.” Yet in Luke 4:18, Jesus cited Isaiah 61:1-2 to explain what was occurring in His earthly ministry, and declared that the Isaiah prophecy was “fulfilled” in that ministry, in other words, before His death (Luke 4:21). According to Christ’s own statements, the most natural way to understand the fulfillment of Isaiah 61:1-2 is that He proclaimed “liberty” (freedom from the power of sin, death, and the devil) and “set at liberty those who are oppressed” (forgave sinners and performed healings, resurrections, and exorcisms) while He still walked the Earth.
The other passage often mentioned is Ephesians 4:9, the verse echoed in the language of the Creed: “Now this, ‘He ascended’ — what does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth?” Yet this verse teaches Christ descending not to hell, but to the Earth (in His incarnation) and to the physical grave (“the lower parts,” the place of Christ’s most profound humiliation). The Second Person of the Trinity descended from Heaven to Earth to be humiliated, and ascended from Earth back to Heaven to be glorified. Thus the Bible verse that became the primary basis for including “He descended into hell” in the Apostles’ Creed teaches exactly what the Heidelberg Catechism affirms about that descent.
What about the placement of the descent clause? Appearing where it does in the Creed – after Christ’s burial and before His resurrection – is perhaps the main reason why Christians assume that Christ visited Hades after His death but before His resurrection. As we have seen, though, “He descended into hell” ought not be understood as the last in a chronological sequence of redemptive acts by our Lord prior to His resurrection, for the Bible doesn’t teach such a thing. Rather, it is a metaphorical summation, a brief recapitulation of all that Jesus suffered in His entire earthly humiliation (from His birth to His burial) and especially on the cross.
As Ursinus concludes, “The soul of Christ, after his death, was, therefore, in the hands of his Father in Paradise, and not in hell.” (Commentary on the Heidelberg Catechism, p. 401)
Controversy and the Calvinist Response
Given the misunderstandings generated by “He descended into hell,” some have asked whether it should be included in the Apostles’ Creed at all. A number of denominations that still use the Creed have deleted the descent clause. Baptist preacher John Piper recently argued it should be omitted on the grounds that there is no scriptural support for Christ descending to Hades. Hank Hanegraff (the “Bible Answer Man”) has also spoken against it, as have various other ministers over the years.
The argument for deleting the clause generally goes like this: “Nothing else in the Creed is a source of controversy except the ‘hell’ statement — why not drop it? Especially since it appeared late? We know from the Bible that Jesus didn’t actually visit Hades after His death, so wouldn’t it be best to eliminate the descent clause, to eliminate misunderstanding and confusion?”
The Calvinistic Reformers recognized the difficulties with the descent clause and the problem with how Christians typically understood it. How they responded to these difficulties helps us to answer the above argument.
There were three ways the Reformers could have chosen to address the problem with the descent clause: 1) stop using the Creed; 2) change the wording of the Creed; 3) explain the Creed in a way that affirms Christ’s saving work and is consistent with the Bible.
The first option would have damaged doctrinal and confessional union with the ancient church. The second would have damaged creedal agreement with other existing churches (e.g., Anglicans, Lutherans). Both options were unthinkable, for the Reformers were firmly committed (so far as they were able) to preserving doctrinal and confessional unity with the ancient and historic church, especially since they were being accused by Roman Catholic authorities of doing the opposite.
Thus the Calvinistic Reformers chose the third option, keeping the Creed as is and explaining “He descended into hell” in biblical terms. This is how they harmonized their commitment to Sola Scriptura and to “the holy, catholic Church” Jesus purchased with His own blood.
Conclusion
Despite the controversy surrounding “He descended into hell,” there are many compelling, biblical reasons to affirm the Heidelberg Catechism’s explanation of the clause — that Christ descended to Earth in His incarnation to suffer the pains of hell as our Sin Bearer. When we confess the descent clause with this understanding, we are expressing confidence that Jesus has satisfied the wrath of God against us sinners, and has delivered us from the eternal “anguish and torment of hell.”
Joe Vusich is a minister in the Reformed Church in the United States (RCUS) and is the pastor of Emmanuel Reformed Church in Sutton, Neb. This article appeared on his blog and is used with permission.