Keller, Calvin, Hell and suffering of Jesus

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stope

Puritan Board Sophomore
Yesterday I read this from Keller "Calvin on “He descended into Hell”"

Today his views were validated by the author of the post "Calvin, Keller and the Westminster Assembly"

They are saying that "Jesus suffered not just bodily pain but all the torments that a soul in hell, cut off from God's presence, would experience".

Then they say "Keller deals with the question of how Christ could have experienced forsakenness on the cross while never actually having lost the love of the Father", and is spoken of this way"

Finally they say "when we say that Christ experienced a true sense of separation and dereliction by the Father, this was only true of his human nature. This feeling in Jesus' body--and particularly in his soul--was generated by the full weight of God's wrath coming upon him"

So, my question is this: If im understanding correct they are saying his human nature suffered the torments of hell and not his divine nature. But, if this is the case, then how could a mere mortal experience an INFINITE punishment for just a portion of time??

Please respond in laymen terms ;)
 
Keller's initial tweet was sloppy. Charity demands I read him in the best light. Strictly speaking, natures don't do things. Persons do, although the natures are always "en-personed."

The Person of Christ experienced all of this. True, his divine nature as such didn't experience any severing or the link, otherwise that would be pure paganism. But there isn't something called an abstract human nature of Jesus just floating around, independent of his Person.
 
Jacob is correct. In addition, we can say, with regard to the punishment issue, that the divine nature sustained the human nature (without changing the human nature) in Christ's personal sin-bearing. This is Ursinus's position, and I have found his description the most helpful in this regard.
 
The Puritan Francis Roberts said it best: “Christ did his opera authoritatis or magisterii, his works of authority from his Godhead; but his opera ministerii, his works of ministry, from his man-hood: but as his natures are united in one person, so his acts and operations from his two principles are conjoined in one mediation”.

WCF 8: Christ, in the work of mediation, acts according to both natures, by each nature doing that which is proper to itself;[37] yet, by reason of the unity of the person, that which is proper to one nature is sometimes in Scripture attributed to the person denominated by the other nature.

Our Lutheran friends attribute the divine attributes to the human nature. We attribute both to the Person (to oversimplify).
 
with regard to the punishment issue, that the divine nature sustained the human nature (without changing the human nature) in Christ's personal sin-bearing
Very helpful indeed!

Are we correct in saying that Christ suffered an infinite amount of the pains of hell, and was able to endure the suffering (ie cease from the torments rather than suffer for eternity) - because he was "sustained" by the divinity?
 
Jason, that is my understanding of the matter, as long as we recognize that Christ suffered as a person, not as a nature.
 
Yesterday I read this from Keller "Calvin on “He descended into Hell”"

Today his views were validated by the author of the post "Calvin, Keller and the Westminster Assembly"

They are saying that "Jesus suffered not just bodily pain but all the torments that a soul in hell, cut off from God's presence, would experience".

Then they say "Keller deals with the question of how Christ could have experienced forsakenness on the cross while never actually having lost the love of the Father", and is spoken of this way"

Finally they say "when we say that Christ experienced a true sense of separation and dereliction by the Father, this was only true of his human nature. This feeling in Jesus' body--and particularly in his soul--was generated by the full weight of God's wrath coming upon him"

So, my question is this: If im understanding correct they are saying his human nature suffered the torments of hell and not his divine nature. But, if this is the case, then how could a mere mortal experience an INFINITE punishment for just a portion of time??

Please respond in laymen terms ;)
Jesus in His humanity experienced the feelings of isolation /separation from the Father just as a sinner does in hell, but that was only while on the Cross as the Sin bearer, and he was never really separated in His deity from the Father. When He completed the "assignment" He said it was accomplished. He went to Paradise to set the captives free there, to go back to Heaven with him, and to declare his victory. ANY additional suffering in hell is what Word of faith heretics teach, and not the Bible.
 
Jesus in His humanity experienced the feelings of isolation /separation from the Father just as a sinner does in hell, but that was only while on the Cross as the Sin bearer, and he was never really separated in His deity from the Father. When He completed the "assignment" He said it was accomplished. He went to Paradise to set the captives free there, to go back to Heaven with him, and to declare his victory. ANY additional suffering in hell is what Word of faith heretics teach, and not the Bible.
Then how could he have suffered in our place? That is, if I deserve 200 days in jail, and the ONLY way that that can be atoned for is if someone else spent those 200 day sin lieu of me
 
Jesus in His humanity experienced the feelings of isolation /separation from the Father just as a sinner does in hell, but that was only while on the Cross as the Sin bearer, and he was never really separated in His deity from the Father.

This isn't wrong per se, but it is not the Reformed way to speak of it. We need to be careful of speaking of natures in the abstract. True, the divine nature didn't suffer, but the divine Person Jesus did. A real Person suffered. The acts of one nature and/or the other are both said to be of the Person.
 
This isn't wrong per se, but it is not the Reformed way to speak of it. We need to be careful of speaking of natures in the abstract. True, the divine nature didn't suffer, but the divine Person Jesus did. A real Person suffered. The acts of one nature and/or the other are both said to be of the Person.
Did the
divine Person Jesus
experience the torments of hell that any mere mortal would endure for eternity, but since Jesus is divine he was somehow able to experience in infinite punishment in a portion of time?
 
Did the experience the torments of hell that any mere mortal would endure for eternity, but since Jesus is divine he was somehow able to experience in infinite punishment in a portion of time?

I don't want to say more than Scripture does. I'm happy to say he was "cut off" (which is covenantal language; Isaiah 53). Hell means different things to different people. Is hell a bar b q pit or is it more psychological or is it beyond that? Whatever the case, I am hesitant to project those notions onto what Jesus suffered.
 
I don't want to say more than Scripture does. I'm happy to say he was "cut off" (which is covenantal language; Isaiah 53). Hell means different things to different people. Is hell a bar b q pit or is it more psychological or is it beyond that? Whatever the case, I am hesitant to project those notions onto what Jesus suffered.
I follow you.

I actual bring it up because its something Ive often wonder and feel is a very fair question and it goes like this:

Q: You deserve the punishment of eternal torments of hell
A: Jesus (graciously) bore your punishment of eternal torments of hell

Q: How could Jesus have bore an eternal punishment unless He is still being punished now and all eternity?
A: Jesus, since he is divine, was somehow able to bear, in all its torturous reality, every moment of your eternal hell. Only the God man could experience that
 
I follow you.

I actual bring it up because its something Ive often wonder and feel is a very fair question and it goes like this:

Q: You deserve the punishment of eternal torments of hell
A: Jesus (graciously) bore your punishment of eternal torments of hell

Q: How could Jesus have bore an eternal punishment unless He is still being punished now and all eternity?
A: Jesus, since he is divine, was somehow able to bear, in all its torturous reality, every moment of your eternal hell. Only the God man could experience that

The duration of the punishment is not necessarily equivalent to the gravity of the crime. For example, it only takes a few seconds to murder someone, but you are going to get executed (or life imprisonment) as a punishment.
 
Then how could he have suffered in our place? That is, if I deserve 200 days in jail, and the ONLY way that that can be atoned for is if someone else spent those 200 day sin lieu of me
Jesus death was a Penal substitution in our place, so dueing those 3 hours of darkness, God the father treated Him who known no sin and was sinless as if he was a sinner.
 
This isn't wrong per se, but it is not the Reformed way to speak of it. We need to be careful of speaking of natures in the abstract. True, the divine nature didn't suffer, but the divine Person Jesus did. A real Person suffered. The acts of one nature and/or the other are both said to be of the Person.
Yes, I agree with you, as Jesus Himself suffered as the sin bearer the holy wrath of God towards sinners, and I was just trying to say that while He really took in full the penalty/wrath of God at that time, He at same time experienced feeling isolated and forsaken, and yet still was not.We can not really state for sure in a totally accurate way what happened there, as that is why I think the father hid Jesus in total darkness.
 
"endured most grievous torments immediately in his soul, and most painful sufferings in his body; was crucified, and died; was buried, and remained under the power of death, yet saw no corruption." (WCF 8.4)

"Q. 46. What was the estate of Christ’s humiliation?
A. The estate of Christ’s humiliation was that low condition, wherein he, for our sakes, emptying himself of his glory, took upon him the form of a servant, in his conception and birth, life, death, and after his death, until his resurrection.

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.

Q. 52. How was Christ exalted in his resurrection?
A. Christ was exalted in his resurrection, in that, not having seen corruption in death (of which it was not possible for him to be held) and having the very same body in which he suffered, with the essential properties thereof (but without mortality and other common infirmities belonging to this life) really united to his soul, he rose again from the dead the third day by his own power; whereby he declared himself to be the Son of God, to have satisfied divine justice, to have vanquished death, and him that had the power of it, and to be Lord of quick and dead: all which he did as a public person, the head of his church, for their justification, quickening in grace, support against enemies, and to assure them of their resurrection from the dead at the last day." (WLC)

I think these are relevant portions of the confession and larger catechism.

Also, here is Fisher's catechism:

"Q. 22. What was it that made the human nature of Christ capable of supporting the utmost effects of the wrath of God?

A. Its union with his divine person, by which it was impossible it could sink under the weight, Isa. 50:7.

Q. 32. Were the soul and body of Christ actually separated by death on the cross?

A. Yes; for when "he had cried with a loud voice, he said, Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit: and having said this, he gave up the ghost," Luke 23:46.

Q. 33. Was either soul or body separated from his divine person?

A. No; it is impossible they could be, because the union of the human nature to his divine person is absolutely inviolable, Jesus being "the same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever," Heb. 13:8."
 
Then how could he have suffered in our place? That is, if I deserve 200 days in jail, and the ONLY way that that can be atoned for is if someone else spent those 200 day sin lieu of me
Perhaps so in a human sense. But sin against God warrants infinite punishment, even the "smallest" sin. Moreover, the non-believer cannot not sin. Even their acts of mercy, helping the old lady across the road, giving to charities, etc., are acts of rebellion, for the motives behind these acts are not to give glory to God. In short, the non-believer hates God with every thought, word, and deed. In Hell they continue in their hate, hence the eternity required for them to absorb the infinite wrath of God.

If anyone in Hell genuinely repented (versus merely regretted) their sins, they would recognize that they are exactly where they should be. In some sense, we might say the gates of Hell are locked from the inside.

Worth a read:
http://heidelblog.net/2014/11/why-did-Jesus-have-to-die-1/
http://heidelblog.net/2014/11/why-did-Jesus-have-to-die-2/
http://heidelblog.net/2014/11/why-did-Jesus-have-to-die-3/

Faustus Socinus (1539–1604), a forerunner of modern Unitarianism, raised a number of objections against this doctrine. The Socinians made Christ more of a teacher and example than a redeemer and priest.

G. H. Kersten, as cited here, outlined Socinus’s objections, and explained why they are false (Reformed Dogmatics [1980], 261, 263):

Objection 1: The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is not necessary. God is not bound to do justice. He is merciful and can simply forgive.
Objection 2: The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is absurd. How can the innocent one be punished, and the guilty one be acquitted? This would set a bad example and corrupt society.
Objection 3: The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is impossible. No one can pay someone else’s moral debt to God. No one can obey in someone else’s place.
Objection 4: The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is harmful. It makes Christ’s love greater than God’s mercy, because Christ was willing to pay when God was not willing to forgive. It also opens the door for people to sin because Christ paid for their sins.

How do you answer those objections?

1. The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is necessary because God is righteous and just in His very being. The Bible insists that God is just and the justifier of sinners who trust in Christ’s blood (Rom. 3:25–26). Forgiveness does not mean God pretends that no evil has been done. God forgives the guilt based on the satisfaction that He Himself paid in His Son.

2. The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is not absurd but most wise because glorifies both God’s mercy and justice. It shows that God’s righteousness and love do not compromise each other or fight against each other, but operate in perfect harmony. It does not corrupt society, but it saves corrupt men and makes them like God in both mercy and justice.

3. The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is possible because Christ, as a divine Person, has the power and freedom to lay down His life and take it up again (John 10:17–18). He therefore could be the Surety, binding Himself to pay our debts to God, for He as God the Son was free from all debts.

4. The satisfaction of God’s justice by Christ is beautiful and helpful because it displays God’s mercy in Christ’s dying love. Christ did not give Himself against the Father’s will, but was sent by the Father because of the Father’s love for sinners (John 3:16). This does not give people permission to sin, but, if they truly receive Him, motivates them to also give their lives in service to others (Eph. 4:32–5:2).

Therefore, it is biblical and right for us to say that Christ acted as a substitute for His elect. He stood in their place to obey God’s law, bear the curse of sin, and pay the full price required to satisfy God’s justice.

God is mercifully just and justly merciful. Let us not fall into the error of Jacob Arminius, who said that God has a throne of mercy and a throne of justice, and His throne of mercy is exalted above His throne of justice. God has one throne, and there mercy and justice dwell together in infinite brightness and joy.

Both justice and mercy shine forth from the cross of Jesus with unspeakable beauty. Yes, His mercy shines all the brighter when seen in the light of His justice. His mercy is for hell-deserving sinners. Nor is it a reluctant mercy. God delights in mercy. That is why, as Luther said, Jesus Christ was reckoned the greatest sinner who ever lived. He that knew no sin became sin to satisfy the justice of God. God’s mercy did not ignore the debt, but paid the price.
 
The duration of the punishment is not necessarily equivalent to the gravity of the crime. For example, it only takes a few seconds to murder someone, but you are going to get executed (or life imprisonment) as a punishment.
Brother what do you mean by this? I very much appreciate your thinking and value your insight... At the end of the day I dont know how the atonement could be effective unless it somehow swallowed all punishment that was due, yet if all punishment that is due is millions of sinners in eternity for hell then doesnt it follow that, in some way, Jesus paid that price?
 
Let's pretend I kill someone. How long does it take? Probably about a second to squeeze the trigger. How long am I punished? Probably with my life or, if you believe in the American penal system, for the rest of my life. Is that fair? The crime itself was almost instantaneous, yet the punishment is probably for decades.

Yet outside of judges who legislate from the bench, no one buys that reasoning for good reason.
 
Let's pretend I kill someone. How long does it take? Probably about a second to squeeze the trigger. How long am I punished? Probably with my life or, if you believe in the American penal system, for the rest of my life. Is that fair? The crime itself was almost instantaneous, yet the punishment is probably for decades.

Yet outside of judges who legislate from the bench, no one buys that reasoning for good reason.
Brother. Thank you for responding. I understand what you are saying, but not sure how it fits together. That is:

If I shoot someone (took 1 minute) and my punishment in 50 years in jail, then if someone else were to atone for my shooting then they would have to go to jail for 50 years. So then, since I deserve ETERNAL punishment, how then could Jesus have paid for an INFINITE amount of time in 33 years?
 
Brother. Thank you for responding. I understand what you are saying, but not sure how it fits together. That is:

If I shoot someone (took 1 minute) and my punishment in 50 years in jail, then if someone else were to atone for my shooting then they would have to go to jail for 50 years. So then, since I deserve ETERNAL punishment, how then could Jesus have paid for an INFINITE amount of time in 33 years?

I sinned against a Person, not against time. The "Equity," so to speak, involves the divine person and not the duration of punishment. Jesus propitiated the Father, not "time" in the abstract.
 
Witsius writes that a sin committed against the infinite majesty of God, a malignity in its measure infinite, and therefore a demerit of punishment in its measure infinite (Economy 1.5.40). The reasons why: this sin is committed against and infinite Good. 2) it would needs be an infinite duration because the blot of sin endures forever, unless washed by Christ.
 
Can you tell me the place so I can find it?

In the new P & R edition it is around p. 885. Here is my summary of it:

The doctrine of endless punishment is associated with the denial of those tenets which are logically and closely connected with it: original sin, vicarious atonement, and regeneration (885).

Rational argument: endless punishment, outside of its scriptural defense, needs three points: a just God, man has free agency, and that sin is a voluntary action (911). The objection that endless punishment is overkill for a temporary sin/crime fails to understand the nature of punishment. You aren’t ever punished for the duration of the crime committed. You are punished, for example, for murdering someone (which usually takes just an instant), not on how long the stabbing took.

The continuous nature of guilt necessitates the endlessness of retribution. Sinners in hell are hardened in their sin. In the very act of transgressing the law of God, there is a reflex action of the human will upon itself, whereby it becomes unable to perfectly keep that law” (923). And the endless suffering of a finite being isn’t exactly “infinite.” The being is finite, since he has a beginning.
 
Turretin writes:

“Christ did not suffer eternal death but a death of three days only, and yet he fully paid the debt of
everlasting punishment which we owed. His, which was one of finite duration, was equivalent to an
everlasting death suffered by us, because of the infinite dignity of his person
. (The Atonement, p.59).

Page 60
“It was not necessary, when Christ was suffering the punishment due to sin, that he should suffer that
despair and gnashing of teeth
, which are a part of the punishment of the damned ; for these are not
essential to the punishment which the judge inflicts or which the surety must bear. They are mere
circumstances, which arise from the character of the persons of the damned, who, when they find that
their torments are overwhelming and eternal, sink into utter despair and gnashing of teeth.
This could not
be so with Christ, who in the midst of his greatest agonies, had full assurance of deliverance and a
resurrection from the tomb, and hence when encompassed by tortures the most excruciating, always
manifested his faith in God—” My God! My God!” are his words.”
 
Turretin writes:

“Christ did not suffer eternal death but a death of three days only, and yet he fully paid the debt of
everlasting punishment which we owed. His, which was one of finite duration, was equivalent to an
everlasting death suffered by us, because of the infinite dignity of his person
. (The Atonement, p.59).

Page 60
“It was not necessary, when Christ was suffering the punishment due to sin, that he should suffer that
despair and gnashing of teeth
, which are a part of the punishment of the damned ; for these are not
essential to the punishment which the judge inflicts or which the surety must bear. They are mere
circumstances, which arise from the character of the persons of the damned, who, when they find that
their torments are overwhelming and eternal, sink into utter despair and gnashing of teeth.
This could not
be so with Christ, who in the midst of his greatest agonies, had full assurance of deliverance and a
resurrection from the tomb, and hence when encompassed by tortures the most excruciating, always
manifested his faith in God—” My God! My God!” are his words.”
Jesus did experience areal separation from the Father while upon the cross though, as he endured Hell for those 3 hours, at least He felt it the same way lost sinners will forever.
 
As a side, there is an article by Rev. Hyde on the Apostles Creed's "he descended into hell". It's worth the read.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top