So recently John Piper wrote this article:
Basically he says that Jesus did not go to hell.
Also Driscol believes the same thing:
I want other believer's beliefs of this so please respond
This is my response
I believe that Jonah is a foreshadowing of Christ. Which is why Christ compares Himself to Jonah in the above passage. Jonah was swallowed by a whale and was in its belly for three days and nights. When you read Jonah 2 it talks about him going into the great deep and that he descended into the roots of the mountains. Essentially Jonah went as low into the earth as any human being can ever go. He was taken to the bottom of mountain seas and was in utter darkness for three days and nights. Jonah was literally taken to the heart of the earth which was symbolic for Christ. When Christ uses heart of the earth it cannot be referring to it physically (since obviously he didnt go past the surface) but in a spiritual sense: hell. I think Christ was really specific when He used his words it couldnt have just been dead on earth for three days and being seen resurrection (which the Pharisees did not see) or Jesus would not have said heart which in Greek literally means centre or inmost part which makes it clear that its not dead on the earth.
In regards to the sign of Jonah, well I think that the sign was that Jonah didnt perform signs but only preached to the people of Nineveh and they all repented! So in the same way, The Pharisees were asking for a sign but Christ essentially saying that preaching is enough and that is why they will be condemned by the people of Nineveh who repented because they Pharisees saw signs and did not believe and still kept asking for more signs where as the people of Nineveh saw no signs and turned to God without them! They Pharisees will have no excuse!
Driscol says that Jesus could not have gone to hell because He told the thief on the cross today you will be with me in paradise I believe that this is also true. A lot of times we ask if God was on earth then was He in Heaven. Well He was in both. So I believe that paradise is referring to God the Father in Heaven. If God could be a man on earth and also be in Heaven then He can also be in Heaven and Hell at the same time. I think three days and nights is different than the way we perceive it in our humanity. So I believe that Jesus did spend three days and nights in hell literally but it does not have to be in line with time in the earthly relm.
2Peter 3:8, But do not forget this one thing, dear friends: With the Lord a day is like a thousand years, and a thousand years are like a day.
Below is the John Piper article:
"Did Jesus Spend Saturday in Hell?
The Apostles Creed says, [He] was crucified, died, and was buried. He descended into hell. The third day He arose again from the dead. There are many meanings given to this phrase. I simply want to ponder the traditional interpretation that Christ went to the place of the dead to preach the gospel to Old Testament saints that he might set them free for the full experience of heaven. This is the view of the Catholic Catechism and many Protestants as well. I dont think this is what the New Testament teaches.
The view is based mainly on two passages in 1 Peter.
Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, (19) in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, (20) because they formerly did not obey, when Gods patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. (1 Peter 3:18-20)
They are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you; (5) but they will give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. (6) For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. (1 Peter 4:4-6)
With regard to 1 Peter 3:19, I take these words to mean that Christ, through the voice of Noah, went and preached to that generation, whose spirits are now in prison, that is, in hell. In other words, Peter does not say that Christ preached to them while they were in prison. He says he preached to them once, during the days of Noah, and now they are in prison.
I think this is suggested as the more natural understanding of the passage in view of what Peter said earlier about the spirit of Christ speaking through the prophets of old.
Concerning this salvation, the prophets who prophesied about the grace that was to be yours searched and inquired carefully, inquiring what person or time the Spirit of Christ in them was indicating when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories. (1 Peter 1:10-11)
With regard to 1 Peter 4:6, I take preached to the dead to refer to those who, after being preached to, have since died. He is not referring to preaching to them after they have died. The context suggests this kind of understanding, as J. N. D. Kelly explains:
They [the Christians] may well have been exposed to scoffing questions from pagan neighbors, and anxious ones from one another, What is the gain of your having become Christians, since you apparently die like other men? The writers answer is that, so far from being useless, the preaching of Christ and his gospel to those who have since died had precisely this end in view, that although according to human calculation they might seem to be condemned, they might in fact enjoy life eternal. (A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and Jude, 175)
I would say, therefore, that there is no textual basis in the New Testament for claiming that between Good Friday and Easter Christ was preaching to souls imprisoned in hell or Hades. There is textual basis for saying that he would be with the repentant thief in Paradise today (Luke 23:43), and one does not get the impression that he means a defective place from which the thief must then be delivered by more preaching.
For these and other reasons, it seems best to me to omit from the Apostles Creed the clause, he descended into hell, rather than giving it other meanings that are more defensible, the way Calvin does."