Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Ephesians 4:9
(Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
9. Now that he ascended ] More lit., Now the [word, or thought,] He ascended.
what is it ] As if to say, “What does it imply? It implies a previous descent, from the seat of royalty. And, in the light of the Fulfilment, this implied descent was ‘to the lower parts of the earth.’ ” The Apostle does not mean that the Psalm teaches anything special about the Descent, but that it implies a Descent, and that what that Descent was, Christians know. And the interest of the implied reference is, its supernatural correspondence in outline to Gospel facts; its imagery being of One who has left His throne and now returns upward.
first ] Evidence is divided as to the right of this word to a place in the text. It is obviously, at worst, explanatory of the sense.
the lower parts of the earth ] Does this mean “the lower regions, even the earth,” as distinct from heaven? Or, “the lower regions of the earth,” i.e. the region underground, the grave and its world? Our great theologian and critical scholar, Bp Pearson ( Exposition of the Creed, Art. V.), inclines to the former view, with a reference to the Incarnation only. The phrase, so taken, may perhaps be illustrated by Isa 44:23; where, however, “lower parts of the earth” (LXX. “foundations of the earth”) may be contrasted with “mountains.” (Cp. also, perhaps, Psa 139:15.) On the other hand Psa 63:9 is distinctly in favour of a reference to “the grave.” Our judgment is on the whole for the second view, with a reference to the Death and Burial of the Incarnate Lord. Such a reference seems better to balance, in a sense, the phrase just below, “far above all heavens ”; it falls in better with the amplitude of the words, “that He might fill all things” (cp. Rom 14:9); and it is in the manner of the N. T. to connect the Resurrection and Ascension as parts of one great whole. And the Lord’s Death is so profoundly concerned with the procurement of blessings to His Church that an allusion to it is priori likely here. Many of the Fathers (see Pearson’s notes under Art. V. of the Creed) take this passage to refer to a definite work done by the Lord in the under-world, a deliverance of the spirits of the Old Testament saints from a “Limbus” there. But certainly the words here teach nothing of the kind; only that He who suffered for us entered the state of disembodied souls, “the Grave,” “Sheol,” “Hades.” The mysterious passage 1Pe 3:18-19, will at once occur in the question. But upon it we can only say here that it is too isolated, and involves too many problems of interpretation, to allow any great and peculiar article of belief to be built upon it; and, upon any view, its only explicit reference is to the generation of the Flood. See again Pearson. And for a different view from his, stated with great ability and insight, see Note II. to The Unsafe Anchor, by the Rev. C. F. Childe.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Now that he ascended – That is, it is affirmed in the Psalm that he ascended – Thou hast ascended on high. This implies that there must have been a previous descent; or, as applicable to the Messiah, it is a truth that he previously descended. It is by no means certain that Paul meant to say that the word ascended demonstrated that there must have been a previous descent; but he probably means that in the case of Christ there was, in fact, a descent into the lower parts of the earth first. The language used here will appropriately express his descent to earth.
Into the lower parts of the earth – To the lowest state of humiliation. This seems to be the fair meaning of the words. Heaven stands opposed to earth. One is above; the other is beneath. From the one Christ descended to the other; and he came not only to the earth, but he stooped to the most humble condition of humanity here; see Phi 2:6-8; compare notes on Isa 44:23. Some have understood this of the grave; others of the region of departed spirits; but these interpretations do not seem to be necessary. It is the earth itself that stands in contrast with the heavens; and the idea is, that the Redeemer descended from his lofty eminence in heaven, and became a man of humble rank and condition; compare Psa 139:15.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Eph 4:9-10
Now that He ascended, what is it but that He also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
He that descended is the same also that ascended.
The eternal union in the person and work of the Redeemer
I. There was union between the greatness of Christs person and the greatness of His obedience. He was so great that He could not be greater. There was no possibility of His going higher. That is what Jesus Christ did in coming to the world–He descended. He not only assumed human nature, body and soul, into union with His Divine Person; but more than that–He descended. The Divine Person came down–the Divine Person was in the manger–He, the whole of Him, was made under the law.
II. There was union between the greatness of the obedience and the merits of the sufferings. Here again there must be no dividing. The sufferings without the obedience would not have been an atonement; and the sufferings and the obedience would not have given satisfaction without the greatness of the Person. And though He rendered perfect obedience in life, yet He could not be a Saviour without suffering–without shedding His blood. In hell there is suffering, but no obedience; in heaven there is obedience, but no suffering; but here, in one place, we behold both obedience and suffering.
III. There is union between the merits of the sufferings and the height of the exaltation (ascension). He who descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens. He could not ascend without descending first, and descending lower than the earth. All the riches of the Godhead as Creator would not pay our debt. He must give Himself as our ransom.
IV. There is union again between the height of his exaltation and his work in filling all things to the end of time: that He might fill all things. The Bible teaches us that He could not fill the Church without ascending up far above all heavens. Whilst here in poverty and bondage, working out our salvation, He was out of His poverty enriching those who came into contact with Him; but now He is rich in mercy, and from the throne He administers forgiveness. His great work on earth was to fill the demands of heaven; and His great work in heaven is to fill the demands of earth. From the earth He filled heaven with obedience; and from heaven He fills the earth with forgiveness. From the earth He filled heaven with satisfaction; and from heaven He fills the earth with peace. From the earth He filled heaven with atonement; and from heaven He fills the earth with holiness. (Lewis Edwards, D. D.)
The contrasted humiliation and exaltation of Christ
I. The circumstances of the Saviours depression from His original state.
1. The incarnation of Christ may be thus expressed.
2. This form of language may denote the death of Christ.
3. This style may be intended to intimate that burial to which He yielded.
4. The separation of the Redeemers Body and Spirit may be described in these words.
II. The glory of His subsequent exaltation.
1. It is in itself an absolute expression of love. To descend to all this humiliation and suffering could not be agreeable to any other end, save an achievement of mercy.
2. It justifies an expectation of surpassing benefits. Whatever was the quality of the act, it must answer to the act itself. Nothing little can it involve. If this be an errand of mercy, how great must be that mercy!
3. The act regulates and secures its own efficiency. The Messiah did not send His word to save us. From on high He did not direct the scheme of salvation. He descended to the lower parts of the earth. This showed His infinite intentness,
4. This act is to be regarded as of incomparable worth and excellence. Never were so combined, and never could so unite, the jealousy of the Infinite Honour and the commiseration of human woe.
III. The reciprocal influence of these respective facts. The same was He who bowed Himself to these indignities, and who seized these rewards. And this identity is of the greatest value. Surely it is much to understand, much to be certified, that He who was manifest in flesh–taking our very nature, seen in the relationships of our life–full of tenderness and compassion–the comforter of mourners and the friend of sinners–is none other than the Supreme over all things, guiding and administering all his prerogatives and powers to the very end for which he was incarnated and crucified. This is what the text affirms. (R. W. Hamilton, D. D.)
The ascension of Christ above all heavens, that He might fill all things
The ascension of Christ (His resurrection completed) sums up, according to Paul, the whole gospel, and stamps it with the seal of heaven. Aristotle tells us of Platos dialogues that they were but beautiful dreams without rational foundation or conclusion, ingenious stories to embody his spiritual instincts rather than to furnish a rational ground capable of sustaining the sublime hopes they seek to embody. How different this from the gospel which furnishes us with facts that are not only capable of sustaining the hopes of the world, but of inspiring hopes which infinitely transcend the highest imaginations of mans unaided powers to conceive, and which daily in our midst prove their Divine source by quickening dead souls, cleansing polluted hearts, and breaking the chains of evil habits!
I. The ascension of Christ looked at in the light of its previous and preparatory history. That the Son of Man ascended from the deepest depth of human history and experience, from the lower parts of the earth, up above all heavens, presupposes His descent. That He ascended, what does it imply but that He descended, and that His original home was above the heavens? He ascends to no height from which He did not descend. In short, to use his own words, that He came out from God and came into the world before He could again leave the world and enter upon His inheritance of the Fathers glory. He who was rich became poor, that we, through His poverty, might be rich.
II. We have now to look at this fact of our Lords ascension in the light of its declared purpose–That He might fill all things, which will reveal its connection with the vaster and ever-enlarging history of the world subsequent to His leaving the earth and His being carried up above all heavens. Let us, however, briefly consider it, first of all with respect to the new heavens and the new earth; then with respect to our nature and history; and lastly, with respect to the providence and government of God–as parts of the great whole to be filled from the fulness of the ascended Son of Man.
1. With respect to the new heavens and the new earth, what may we not infer, from the ascension of Christ in the full integrity of His nature, as to the conversion, transformation, and ennobling of the material of our earthly sphere? The nature and history of His person clearly reveal the relations between heaven and earth, the material and the spiritual, God and man. We cannot for a moment look upon the transformation and exaltation of Christs nature as an isolated fact, or as dissociated from the restitution of all things. The gospel, therefore, contains a gospel for nature as well as for man, the prediction of the day when the strife of elements shall cease, when the powers of darkness shall be swallowed up of light, when the lion shall lie down with the lamb, when the tares shall no longer grow with the wheat, when creation, now so weary, shall lift up her head and rejoice in the redemption for which she groans and travails.
2. Having seen what we are taught by the ascension of Christ with respect to the new heavens and the new earth, let us now consider what we should learn from it with respect to man. For if we cannot dissociate the history of Jesus from the history of the earth, much less are we able to do so from the history of mankind. He almost always speaks of Himself as the Son of Man. In Jesus Christ the headship of mankind is at the right hand of God with full powers of deliverance and exaltation for all men. By His ascension our nature is endowed with an exalted fulness, and clothed with a glory becoming the Son of God. In Jesus our nature is filled with all the fulness and clothed with all the glory of the Father. And, as such, He is exalted above the heavens on our behalf, as the centre of a new kingdom–a human kingdom–the kingdom of God and of His Christ. It is reserved for human nature to constitute the home kingdom of God. The kingdom of God is to be set up in our nature, and to unite the innermost powers of humanity with the innermost powers of Deity. But this kingdom of God is also to be the temple of God, not merely a Divine dominion lying round about and without the immediate presence of the King, and only indirectly and mediately associated with Him, but the sphere of His household presence–His home–the very life of which will be the enjoyment and worship of Himself.
3. Having considered the ascension of Christ in its relation to the new heavens and the new earth, and also with respect to the nature and history of man, let us now look at it, briefly, in its relation to the government and providence of God. If nature is gathered up and crowned in man, and mankind are gathered tip and represented in the Son of Man, who is exalted to the throne of universal dominion, then it is clear that all things are governed and caused to work together in the interests of His kingdom, which centres in His body the Church, which is His Bride; that all things are bent to one purpose, the end to which the whole creation moves. The history of the world and man, of nature, providence, and grace, is thus seen to be one whole of many parts, in which there has been nothing parenthetic or episodical–nothing in vain, but which has been working together for the one foreseen and pre-determined end. Tempest and storm have combined with sunshine and zephyr; anarchy and rebellion have wrought with submission and order; war and peace, slavery and liberty, sickness and health, death and life have all been made to cooperate in bringing about the condition and prospects of the present hour which carries the necessary preparations, and is charged with the necessary powers for the grand consummation of the Divine purpose. The leaven works through all elements; the tree grows through all seasons; the kingdom advances with every age.
III. In the last place, we can but very briefly glance at the method and means by which this purpose, for which the Son of man; is exalted above all the heavens, is to be carried out. It is being fulfilled in many ways; all means are subordinate to this one end. That He might fill all things is the one purpose–The one far off Divine event to which the whole creation moves. For this the heavens watch the earth labours, the elements work, and the undesigned strife of human history is carried on. Two things are ours–preaching and prayer, alike our duty and our privilege. By these the Church of 120 very soon over ran the nations, and turned the world upside down. By these now will the triumphs of the Church be carried on to her final conquests. (W. Pulsford, D. D.)
Christ filling all things
I. Christs life was marked by changes the most unparalleled. He descended from the highest circumstances to the lowest, and ascended from the lowest to the highest again.
II. Amidst all these changes He preserved His identity: the same.
1. The same in being.
2. The same in sympathy.
3. The same in purpose.
III. The grand end of these changes was the spreading of the highest influence through the universe. That He might fill all things. Fill all institutions, books, intellect, hearts, with His system and Spirit. (David Thomas.)
Christ filling all things
I. How Christ fills all things. Not with His body–for as it has been well said, Christs body may be anywhere at any time; but Christs Spirit is everywhere at all times. Of that body of Christ–of spiritual body at all, still more of spiritual body glorified–we know, and we can know, nothing; but, as far as our faculties can reach, body must occupy definite space. How, then, does Christ fill all things?
1. By His influence. We know that even here a person may occupy a much larger sphere than he actually fills with his presence. Carry on that idea of the power of extending influence infinitely, and we shall be arriving at some conception of the way in which Christ can fill all things. The effect of such a life and death–the beauty of that unparalleled character–the effect of that upon a world, who can estimate? How it has moulded the mind–how it has raised the tone–how it has determined the conduct of all mankind.
2. But there is more than influence, there is sovereignty and care. The queen fills her realms, and we are always conscious of the power of our queen. How much more does the royal, superintending power and love of Jesus fill the universe; There is nothing so small, that it is below it; and there is nothing so great, that it is above it; nothing independent of it; nothing despised by it.
3. By the presence of the Holy Ghost.
II. What does Christ fill? All things.
1. Heaven. Every spirit in heaven reflects Him. Every tongue tells of Him. Every joy is full of Him. Every holiness glorifies Him.
2. And there is a solemn sense in which Christ fills hell. A rejected Saviour–nothing else.
3. Christ fills all nature. You will miss the sweetness of nature, if you do not feel this. Christ is in the leaf and flower–in the morning blush and the evening glow–in the song of the little bird–in the loneliness of solitude–in the harmony of the landscape.
4. And providence–i.e., the ordered course of human events–it is all Christ. What is providence? The working together of all things for the sake of Gods people. Who administers Gods great empire with the delegated power? Christ. He hath put all things in subjection under His feet. Is it a sorrow? Christ fills that sorrow. Is it a joy? Christ fills that joy. And this is the true meaning of life; an inner current of Christ always running along parallel with the flow of events.
5. But, still more, the Church–the Church, which is His fulness–because He fills it. All ordinances, all gifts, all communications of the Spirit, all prayer and preaching, all our sweet worship, all our blessed sacraments, all our fellowships, all our sympathies, all our diversities, all our oneness–it is all Christ. Nothing would be real without Him. It is as He is there, that anything has power to teach, or to comfort, or to bless.
III. Why does Christ fill all things?
1. That all honours should be to Him in every degree; that all should owe all always to Him; that He should be the light and joy of the whole world.
2. That no man upon this earth should ever find any real satisfaction out of Christ. If you do, the voids will be always greater than the comforts. Other things may promise–but He is truth. Other things may trifle with you–but He loves you. Other things may please–but He fills.
3. That there may be always, in Christ, a fulness suited to every mans want. If we only look high enough, there is the fountain filled:–a full pardon–a full Bible–a full smile–a full rest–a full life–and a full heaven.
4. And so it comes at last to pass, that, in everything, it is not the thing, but the Christ that is in it–for He so fills, that He becomes the thing He fills; and, little by little, the crust drops off–like the shell horn the fruit; or, like the covering from the blossom. The external ceases; the material falls away; the material passes; and the Christ which it contains, stands out alone–the All in all of His servants souls: so that we have, and desire to have, in either world, only Him! (J. Vaughan, M. A.)
The humiliation and ascension of Christ
I. Christs humiliation and descension. Christ descended according to His Divine nature, not indeed by a proper and local motion; but because it united itself to a nature here below; in respect of which union to an earthly nature, it might metaphorically be said to descend to the place where that nature did reside. And thus much for the way and manner how Christ did descend. We are now to direct our next inquiry to the place whither He descended; and for this we are to reflect an eye upon the former verse of this chapter, which tells us that it was into the lower parts of the earth; but what those lower parts of the earth are, here lies the doubt, and here must be the explication. I conceive these words in the text to bear the same sense with, and perhaps to have reference to, those in Psa 139:15, where David, speaking of his conception in his mothers womb, says, that he was framed and fashioned in the lowest parts of the earth. In like manner, Christs descending into the lowest parts of the earth, may very properly be taken for His incarnation and conception in the womb of the blessed Virgin. I add, that these words, of Christs descending and ascending, are so put together in the text, that they seem to intend us a summary account of Christs whole transaction of that great work of mans redemption from first to last; which being begun in His conception, and consummate in His ascension, by what better can His descending be explained, than by His conception, the first part and instance of this great work, as His ascension was the last? So that by this explication the apostles words are cast into this easy and proper sense, that the same Christ, and eternal Son of God, who first condescended and debased Himself so far as to be incarnate and conceived in the flesh, was He who afterwards ascended into heaven, and was advanced to that pitch of sublime honour and dignity, far above the principalities and powers of men and angels.
II. Christs exaltation and ascension. As for the way and manner how He ascended, I affirm that it was according to His human nature, properly and by local motion; but according to His Divine, only by communication of properties, the action of one nature being ascribed to both, by virtue of their union in the same person. As for the place to which He advanced, it is, says the apostle, far above all heavens. But the words of the text have something of figure, of hyperbole, and latitude in them; and signify not, according to their literal niceness, a going above the heavens by a local superiority; but an advance to the most eminent place of dignity and glory in the highest heaven.
III. The qualification and state of Christs person. In reference to both these conditions He was the same–He that descended is the same also that ascended. Which to me seems a full argument to evince the unity of the two natures in the same person; since two several actions are ascribed to the same person, both of which, it is evident, could not be performed by the same nature.
IV. The end of Christs ascension that He might fill all things. Now, Christ may be said thus to fill all things in a double respect.
1. In respect of the omnipresence of His nature and universal diffusion of His Godhead. But yet this is not the filling all things directly intended in the text; for that was to be consequent to His ascension; He ascended that He might fill all things; it accrued to Him upon and after His ascension, not before; but His omnipresential filling all things being an inseparable property of His Divine nature, always agreed to Him, and was not then at length to be conferred on Him.
2. In the second place, therefore, Christ may be said to fill all things, in respect of the universal rule and government of all things in heaven and earth committed to Him as Mediator upon His ascension. All the elements the whole train and retinue of nature, are subservient to His pleasure, and instruments of His purposes. The stars fight in their courses under His banner, and subordinate their powers to the dictates of His will. The heavens rule all below them by their influences, but themselves are governed by His. He can command nature out of its course, and reverse the great ordinances of the creation. The government, the stress and burden of all things, lies upon His hands. The blind heathen have been told of an Atlas that shoulders up the heavens; but we know that He who supports the heavens is not under them, but above them. (R. South, D. D.)
The end and design of Christs ascension
1. In the first place, this term all things may refer to the whole series of prophecies and predictions recorded of Christ in the Scriptures; which He might be said to fill, or rather to fulfil by His ascension.
2. But, secondly, the term all things may refer to the Church; which sense I shall most insist upon, as carrying in it the subject matter of this days commemoration. Now, Christ, it seems, would not have the fabric of His Church inferior to that of the universe: it being itself indeed a lesser world picked or rather sifted out of the greater, where mankind is brought into a narrower compass, but refined to a greater perfection. And, as in the constitution of the world, the old philosophy strongly asserts that nature has with much care filled every little space and corner of it with body, there being nothing that it so much abhors as a vacuity: so Christ, as it were, following the methods of nature in the works of grace, has so advantageously framed the whole system of the Church; first, by an infinite power making in it capacities, and then by an equal goodness filling them. Now the Church being a society of men combined together in profession of Christian religion, it has unavoidably a double need or necessity emergent from its very nature and constitution. That is, one of government, the other of instruction; the first agreeing to it simply as a society, the second, as it is such a society. And it is Christs great prerogative to fill it in both these respects.
I. As for the time in which it was conferred, this is remarkable in a double respect.
1. In respect of the Christian religion itself, it being about its first solemn promulgation. The beginning of everything has a strange and potent influence upon its duration. And the first appearances usually determine men either in their acceptance or dislike. Had not Christ therefore ushered in His religion by miracle and wonder, and arrested mens first apprehensions of it by something grand and supernatural; He had hindered its progress by a disadvantageous setting forth, exposed it naked to infidelity, and so rendered it first disputable, and then despised. It had been like the betraying a sublime and noble composition by a low and creeping prologue, which blasts the reputation of the ensuing discourse, and shuts up the auditors approbation with prejudice and contempt.
2. But, secondly, the time of Christs sending the Spirit is very remarkable in respect of the apostles themselves. It was when they entered upon the full execution of their apostolic office; and from followers of Christ became the great leaders of the world.
II. The manner how it was conferred (see Act 2:2-3). This action exhibits to the world the great means chosen by God for the propagation of the kingdom of Christ.
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 9. But that he also descended] The meaning of the apostle appears to be this: The person who ascended is the Messiah, and his ascension plainly intimates his descension; that is, his incarnation, humiliation, death, and resurrection.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first? The apostle interprets the psalmist, and concludes that David, when he foretold Christs glorification, or ascending up to heaven, did likewise foresee his humiliation and descent to the earth: q.d. When David speaks of God in the flesh ascending up on high, he doth thereby imply, that he should first descend to the earth.
Into the lower parts of the earth; either simply the earth, as the lowest part of the visible world, and so opposed to heaven, from whence he came down, Joh 3:13; 6:33,38,41,42,50,51; or the grave and state of the dead; or both rather, implying the whole of his humiliation, in opposition to his ascending, taken for the whole of his exaltation.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
9. Paul reasons that (assumingHim to be God) His ascent implies a previous descent;and that the language of the Psalm can only refer to Christ,who first descended, then ascended. For God the Father does notascend or descend. Yet the Psalm plainly refers to God(Eph 4:8; Eph 4:17;Eph 4:18). It must therefore beGOD THE SON(Joh 6:33; Joh 6:62).As He declares (Joh 3:13), “Noman hath ascended up to heaven, but He that came down fromheaven.” Others, though they did not previously descend,have ascended; but none save Christ can be referred to in thePsalm as having done so; for it is of God it speaks.
lower parts of the earthTheantithesis or contrast to “far above all heavens,” is theargument of ALFORD andothers, to show that this phrase means more than simply the earth,namely, the regions beneath it, even as He ascended not merelyto the visible heavens, but “far above” them. Moreover, Hisdesign “that He might fill all things” (Eph4:10, Greek, “the whole universe of things”) mayimply the same. But see on Eph 4:10on those words. Also the leading “captive” of the “captivehand” (“captivity”) of satanic powers, may imply thatthe warfare reached to their habitation itself (Ps63:9). Christ, as Lord of all, took possession first of the earththe unseen world beneath it (some conjecture that the region of thelost is in the central parts of our globe), then of heaven (Act 2:27;Act 2:28). However, all we surelyknow is, that His soul at death descended to Hades, that is,underwent the ordinary condition of departed spirits of men. Theleading captive of satanic powers here, is not said to be at Hisdescent, but at His ascension; so that no argument can bedrawn from it for a descent to the abodes of Satan. Act 2:27;Act 2:28, favor the view of thereference being simply to His descent to Hades. So PEARSONin Exposition of the Creed (Php2:10).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Now that he ascended,…. These words are a conclusion of Christ’s descent from heaven, from his ascension thither; for had he not first descended from thence, it could not have been said of him that he ascended; for no man hath ascended to heaven but he that came down from heaven, Joh 3:13 and they are also an explanation of the sense of the psalmist in the above citation, which takes in his humiliation as well as his exaltation; which humiliation is signified by his descent into the earth:
what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? this the Papists understand of his decent into a place they call Limbus Patrum, which they make to be contiguous to hell; and where they say the patriarchs were detained till Christ’s coming; and that he went thither to deliver them out of it; and that these are the captivity he led captive; all which is fictitious and fabulous: for certain it is, that the place where Abraham was with Lazarus in his bosom was not near to hell, but afar off, and that there was a great gulf between them, Lu 16:23 and the spirits or souls of the patriarchs returned to God that gave them, when separated from their bodies, as the souls of men do now, Ec 12:7 nor did Christ enter any such feigned place at his death, but went to paradise, where the penitent thief was that day with him; nor were the patriarchs, but the principalities and powers Christ spoiled, the captivity he led captive and triumphed over: some interpret this of Christ’s descent into hell, which must be understood not locally, but of his enduring the wrath of God for sin, which was equivalent to the torments of hell, and of his being in the state of the dead; but it may rather design the whole of his humiliation, as his descent from heaven and incarnation in the virgin’s womb, where his human nature was curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth; and his humbling himself and becoming obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, when he was made sin and a curse for his people, and bore all the punishment due to their transgressions; and his being in Hades, in the state of the dead, in the grave, in the heart of the earth, as Jonah in the whale’s belly: reference seems to be had to Ps 139:15 where “the lower parts of the earth”, is interpreted by the Targum on the place of , “his mother’s womb”; and so it is by Jarchi, Aben Ezra, Kimchi, and Ben Melec. The Alexandrian copy and the Ethiopic version leave out the word “first” in this clause.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Now this ( ). Paul picks out the verb (second aorist active participle of , to go up), changes its form to (second aorist indicative), and points the article () at it. Then he concludes that it implied a previous (coming down).
Into the lower parts of the earth ( ). If the is the Ascension of Christ, then the would be the Descent (Incarnation) to earth and would be the genitive of apposition. What follows in verse 10 argues for this view. Otherwise one must think of the death of Christ (the descent into Hades of Ac 2:31).
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Now that He ascended. vers. 9 and 10 are parenthetical, showing what the ascension of Christ presupposes. By descending into the depths and ascending above all, He entered upon His function of filling the whole universe, in virtue of which function He distributes gifts to men. See ch. Eph 1:23. Rev., properly, inserts this, thus giving the force of the article which calls attention to the fact of ascension alluded to in the quotation. “Now the or this ‘He ascended.” ‘ What is it but. What does it imply?
Descended first [ ] . His ascent implies a previous descent. A. V. reads first, following the Tex. Rec. prwton. Rev., correctly, He also descended. Compare Joh 3:13.
The lower parts of the earth [ ] . The under world. The reference is to Christ ‘s descent into Hades. Some give the words a comparative force, deeper than the earth.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “Now that he ascended” (to de anebe) “Moreover the one who ascended.” The idea is “now the Word (Jesus Christ) He ascended,” implying a previous descent from the heavens, His former position of riches and royalty, Act 1:10-11; 1Co 8:9.
2) “What is it but that he also descended” (ti estin ei, me hoti kai katebe) “What is it except that also he descended.” The idea is what does it mean except or unless He first descended or came down to earth from heaven, Joh 3:13. From royalty and glory He came to shame and poverty for all, Php_2:5-11.
3) “First into the lower parts of the earth?” (eis ta katotera mere tes ges) “Into the lower parts of the earth?” The phrase “lower parts of the earth” seems to refer to the earth, in contrast to heaven, not of a specific or definite place or a part of the earth, any more than that He ascended from a specific place in heaven.
It was not from “hades” (either the grave or a place of departed spirits) He ascended, but from Bethany on the Mount of Olives. Luk 24:50-51. As in Php_2:5-10, our Lord’s humiliation and incarnation are contrasted.
It may therefore be concluded that neither in Psa 68:18 nor in contextual connection with this passage is sheol, hell, or the grave specifically mentioned. It is the person of Jesus Christ who ascended from the earth scene back to His native heaven scene from where He descended that is contrasted, after which, on Pentecost, He began giving the charismatic gifts to men.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
9. Now that he ascended. Here again the slanderers exclaim, that Paul’s reasoning is trifling and childish. “Why does he attempt to make those words apply to a real ascension of Christ, which were figuratively spoken about a manifestation of the Divine glory? Who does not know that the word ascend is metaphorical? The conclusion, that he also descended first, has therefore no weight.”
I answer, Paul does not here reason in the manner of a logician, as to what necessarily follows, or may be inferred, from the words of the prophet. He knew that what David spake about God’s ascension was metaphorical. But neither can it be denied, that the expression bears a reference to some kind of humiliation on the part of God which had previously existed. It is this humiliation which Paul justly infers from the declaration that God had ascended. And at what time did God descend lower than when Christ emptied himself? ( ᾿Αλλ ᾿ ἑαυτὸν ἐκένωσε, Phi 2:7.) If ever there was a time when, after appearing to lay aside the brightness of his power, God ascended gloriously, it was when Christ was raised from our lowest condition on earth, and received into heavenly glory.
Besides, it is not necessary to inquire very carefully into the literal exposition of the Psalm, since Paul merely alludes to the prophet’s words, in the same manner as, on another occasion, he accommodates to his own subject a passage taken from the writings of Moses. “The righteousness which is of faith speaketh in this manner, Say not in thine heart, who shall ascend into heaven? (that is, to bring Christ down from above;) or, who shall descend into the deep (that is, to bring up Christ again from the dead.”) (Rom 10:6 Deu 30:12.) But the appropriateness of the application which Paul makes of the passage to the person of Christ is not the only ground on which it must be defended. Sufficient evidence is afforded by the Psalm itself, that this ascription of praise relates to Christ’s kingdom. Not to mention other reasons which might be urged, it contains a distinct prophecy of the calling of the Gentiles.
Into the lower parts of the earth. (140) These words mean nothing more than the condition of the present life. To torture them so as to make them mean purgatory or hell, is exceedingly foolish. The argument taken from the comparative degree, “the lower parts,” is quite untenable. A comparison is drawn, not between one part of the earth and another, but between the whole earth and heaven; as if he had said, that from that lofty habitation Christ descended into our deep gulf.
(140) For ‘the lower parts of the earth,’ they may possibly signify no more than the place beneath; as when our Savior said, (Joh 8:23,) ‘Ye are from beneath, I am from above; ye are of this world, I am not of this world;’ or as God spake by the prophet, ‘I will shew wonders in heaven above, and signs in the earth beneath.’ Nay, they may well refer to his incarnation, according to that of David, (Psa 139:15,) or to his burial. (Psa 63:9.)” — Pearson.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
SPECIAL STUDY IDID CHRIST GO TO HELL?
Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? Eph. 4:9.
Some people have thought that during the time between Christs death on the cross and His resurrection, He went down into hell (or Hades) to preach to the people there, and to bring out the saints of Old Testament times who could not previously be taken into Gods presence because no atonement price had been paid for their sins.
THE INTERPRETERS BIBLE says of Eph. 4:9 that it is certainly a reference the earliest in Christian literature to the descent of Christ into Hades.
The Apostles (?) Creed says, He (Christ) descended into hell. This doctrine is elaborately set forth in the Gospel of Nicodemus, an apocryphal gospel, which, according to the general consensus of scholars, was composed in the fifth century.
Those who accept this doctrine maintain that such references as 1Pe. 3:19; 1Pe. 4:6, Eph. 4:9; and Mat. 27:52-53 support it.
However, there is much disagreement as to WHAT Christ may have done in hell (or really, Hades, the unseen world of all the dead). According to the Gospel of Nicodemus (a highly imaginary legend), Christ, between the time He died and rose again, went down to Hades to rescue Adam, Noah, Moses, Isaiah, and all the other Old Testament saints. They were being kept away from Gods presence until the time when Christ should die and make complete atonement for the sins of all mankind of all ages.
Such teaching as this contradicts Rom. 3:25, which says that God passed over . . . the sins done aforetime during the time of His forbearance. Apparently the Old Testament saints were ushered into heaven when they died, even as we are. Elijah was taken into heaven (2Ki. 2:1; 2Ki. 2:11), and apparently Enoch was also (Heb. 11:5). We read that Abraham was accounted righteous by faith (Rom. 4:3). If God accounted him righteous, why should he have been shut off from God in a prison? It is true that full payment had not yet been made for the sins of these people until Christ died. But Christ is the Lamb of God, slain from the foundation of the world (Rev. 13:8; Rev. 5:6). Therefore, in anticipation of that sacrifice, God passed over the sins of the Old Testament saints.
1Pe. 3:19 tells of Christ preaching to those who were in prison. Therefore, some have understood that Christ preached to the sinners in Hades, such as those who had been disobedient in the days of Noah.
There are many unanswerable questions and objections to the idea that Christ preached to the sinners in Hades.
(1)
Why did He preach JUST to the sinners who were disobedient in the days of Noah, as the text indicates? Other ages had many disobedient, lost people who would have needed Christ.
(2)
WHAT could Christ have preached to them? Between His death and resurrection, Christ could not have preached the gospel. For the gospel consists of His death, burial, AND RESURRECTION (1Co. 15:1-4). We know that Christ was raised for our justification (Rom. 4:25). Therefore, during the period between His death and resurrection, Christ could not have offered them justification. Did He, then, go to hell to taunt those who were lost?
(3)
WHAT PURPOSE would Christ have had for going to Hades? It is certain that the wicked were offered no second chance (2Pe. 2:5; 2Pe. 2:9). And the righteous with their sins passed over did not need to be rescued.
(4)
WHAT RESULTS could Christ have expected from such a preaching expedition? No one doubts that one could hold a hot revival meeting in hell! Note how concerned the rich man in Hades was about his soul and the souls of his brothers (Luk. 16:24-28). But note also that Abraham said it was impossible for the rich man to change his state. Christ did not raise the wicked dead from the graves, and He could not have preached justification to them until He arose Himself.
To test any interpretation of a difficult Bible passage, such as 1Pe. 3:19, three questions may be asked:
(1)
Exactly what does the text say? Are we reading ideas into it that are not actually stated in the text?
(2)
Does the interpretation contradict other more plain passages of Scripture? Does it harmonize with other Scriptures?
(3)
Does the interpretation fit into the context of the passage, so as to make one harmonious teaching with what goes before and what follows?
Let us consider the doctrine that Christ went to preach in hell in the light of the three questions given above:
(1)
The text says that Christ was put to death in His flesh; but that He was quickened, or made alive, in (His) spirit. The word spirit should not be capitalized here, as it is in the King James Version. The Greek text simply says, in spirit, rather than in THE (Holy) Spirit Now we know that Christs spirit never actually died, but went into Paradise (Luk. 23:46). The spirit of Christ was quickened in the sense that it received an increased vigor and power after His sufferings in the flesh. Read 1Pe. 3:22 to see how His spirit was quickened.
In speaking of the spirit of Christ, which was quickened, Peter says that Christ also went in spirit and preached unto the spirits in prison. Just WHEN He preached is not clearly indicated here. From this verse alone one could not determine whether the spirits were in prison when Christ preached to them, or were in prison when Peter wrote this letter, which was many years later.
(2)
The doctrine that Christ preached to sinners in Hades contradicts Peters own writings. 2Pe. 2:4-5; 2Pe. 2:9 : For if God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to Hell (Tartarus), and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment, and spared not the old world, but saved Noah the eighth person (with seven others) – – – the Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations, and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be punished. These verses positively rule out the doctrine that Christ offered these sinners of ancient times a second chance (and we can conceive of no other reason why Christ should have preached to them).
Furthermore, the doctrine contradicts Christs statement in Luk. 23:43 that He would be in Paradise after His death. Certainly the sinners who had been disobedient in the days of Noah were not in Paradise where Christ went.
(3)
The thought of the whole passage, 1Pe. 3:17-22; 1Pe. 4:1-2, is that it is better to suffer, if need be, in well-doing than to compromise with evil. (Note especially 1Pe. 3:17 and 1Pe. 4:1.) To prove this point, the sufferings of Christ are set forth as an illustration. (See 1Pe. 3:18.) The glory that came to Him after His sufferings (see 1Pe. 3:22) shows us that we will also do well to endure sufferings patiently.
Question Does the supposed preaching expedition into Hades show that Christs sufferings were rewarded? And does it thus set forth His sufferings as an encouragement to us in suffering? The answer is no to both of these questions. Since we know nothing whatever about what this supposed preaching expedition accomplished, why should it encourage us to bear sufferings? There is no hope or encouragement for us in thinking that Christs sufferings were followed by a preaching expedition into Hades, when we do not know the results of that preaching. This doctrine does not fit into the context of the passage, as required by question (3) above.
THE TRUE INTERPRETATION OF 1Pe. 3:19
Naturally we are unsatisfied to say, I dont believe that Christ went to hell, We want to know what we may believe as truth. It seems to us that the true interpretation of 1Pe. 3:19 may be perceived from what has been written before in this special study, and from these verses:
(1)
1Pe. 1:11 The prophets – – – prophesied – – – searching what manner of time the Spirit of Christ, which was in them, did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ.
(2)
2Pe. 2:5 Noah was a preacher of righteousness.
(3)
Gen. 6:3 And the Lord said, My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for that he also is flesh.
Gods Spirit, which is the same as the Spirit of Christ, or the Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:9), strove with men in the days of Noah. But it was through the prophets (preachers) that the Spirit of Christ testified. Noah was a preacher of righteousness. In the days of Noah, Christs Spirit preached through Noah to those who were disobedient in those days, and who have therefore ever since been reserved in prison unto judgment. And, of course, they were in prison when Peter wrote his epistle.
Let us test this interpretation in the light of the three questions given before:
(1)
There is nothing in this interpretation out of harmony with the exact words and thoughts of the text (1Pe. 3:19).
(2)
This view is in harmony with the Scriptures given above (1Pe. 1:11; 2Pe. 2:5; Gen. 6:3). A parallel thought is in Eph. 2:17. In that passage Paul told the Ephesians that Christ came and preached peace to you that were far off. Of course, Christ came and preached to the Ephesians in the persons of His apostles, just as He went and preached in Noahs day through Noah. In both cases, the Spirit of Christ preached, but the words were uttered through human lips.
(3)
This interpretation fits wonderfully into the context of the passage, which is designed to teach us that we should suffer, if need be, for well doing, because Christ so suffered. Note how well it fits into the argument:
Peter mentioned (Eph. 3:18) that Christs Spirit was quickened after His sufferings. Having mentioned Christs Spirit, he said that ALSO Christ went in that Spirit and preached to the spirits now in prison. Of course, that preaching was done long before He suffered. Note that FEW (only eight) were saved as a result of that preaching.
Since that time Christ has suffered and died to bring us unto God. He wished to bring the men in Noahs day to God, but few obeyed.
Behold now the increased power in the preaching of Christ since His sufferings. Millions of souls have been saved through water (baptism), while only eight were saved through water in the days of Noah before Christ suffered. Those who read Peters letter could themselves testify that Christs preaching to them through His apostles was vastly more fruitful than His preaching in old times through Noah before He suffered.
According to 1Pe. 3:21, we are saved by baptism through the resurrection of Christ. If there had been no suffering, there would have been no resurrection. With no resurrection, there would have been no baptism and no salvation. Christs sufferings were therefore necessary and very fruitful. We should take courage by the example of His sufferings.
Christ once said (Joh. 12:32), And I, IF I be lifted up from the earth (that is, crucified), will draw all men unto me. This increased spiritual power of Christ to draw all mankind since His suffering, is what Peter meant by Christ being quickened in spirit.
What about the other Scriptures that are set forth as support for the doctrine that Christ went into Hades?
(1)
Eph. 4:8-9. See the notes in this book on these verses.
(2)
Mat. 27:52-53 We know nothing whatsoever about this event, except the bare facts as recorded. It is pure speculation to try to make these verses fit into a theory about Christ going into Hades, The temporary resurrection of these saints is no greater a miracle than the resurrection of Lazarus and similar events. Many things occurred during the earthly sojourn of Christ that proved His deity. This event certainly proved that Christ was the very Son of God, More we cannot say.
(3)
1Pe. 4:6 Who are the dead to whom the gospel was preached? They were not the souls of the dead, but those who were once alive, and are now dead. When they were living, the Word of God was preached to them. Now they are dead, Thus the gospel was preached to the dead. This verse should help us to understand 1Pe. 3:19, which tells of Christ preaching to the spirits in prison.
1Pe. 4:5, the verse immediately preceding the one we are now considering, speaks of Christ as being ready to judge the quick (or living) and the dead. This obviously refers to those who will have died before Christ returns, as contrasted to those who will be living when He comes back.
Our conclusion is that the doctrine that Christ went into Hades is not taught in the Bible, and contradicts the Bible. It is an unprofitable, speculative, controversial, confusing teaching. A man could hold this doctrine and still be a Christian, but the doctrine itself is error.
Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series
(9) The lower parts of the earth.This may mean either the regions of the earth, as lower than heaven, or the regions beneath the earth. The reasoning of the text in itself would be satisfied by the former. For St. Paul is simply arguing that the use of the phrase ascended from earth to heaven implies a previous corresponding descent, which must be from heaven to earth; exactly as in Joh. 3:13, No man hath ascended into heaven, but He that came down from heaven. But form and usage of the phrase itself seem to point to the other meaning, which is held by almost all ancient interpreters and most moderns. It agrees with the strong expression of filling all things, in Eph. 4:10, and is possibly suggested by the leading captive of the powers of hell and death. Though, perhaps, injurious to the strictness of the antithesis, it is quite accordant with St. Pauls manner to introduce thus a fresh idea beyond the simple idea of descent, which is sufficient for his argument: He descendedyea, even to the realms below. For this idea is most apposite to that frequent reference to spiritual powers of evil found in this Epistle, and it may be thought to correspond by antithesis to the far above all heavens of the next verse.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
(9, 10) These verses form a parenthesis, designed to bring out the pervading idea of this and the parallel Epistlethe Divine humanity of Christ as filling all in all and gathering all things into Himself.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
9. Now The apostle now proceeds to give an exegesis of the psalmist’s words to show their applicability. The fact that the psalmist’s Jehovah ascended, implies that he had previously descended. Now commentators decide variously the questions that naturally arise. Does St. Paul here simply quote a passage from the Psalms as we would quote a passage of poetry apt to our subject? Or, does he view Jehovah’s ascent, with its implied descent, as a fitting emblem of Christ’s descent and ascension? Or is the former a divinely appointed type of the latter? Or were the images and words imparted by the true Jehovah-Jesus to his prophet-psalmist, truly, as by a glimpse, delineating his own descent and ascension? Either of these views justifies the apostle’s language. We prefer the first. As psalmist and apostle were both endowed with the same inspiration, St. Paul assuredly gives a true meaning, if not the sole true meaning, of the psalmist’s words; nay, he had a true endowment to read a new true meaning into the old words.
Lower parts of the earth By one class of commentators this phrase is made to signify simply the earth; that is, these lower grounds, consisting of earth, in contrast with the heavens above. The phrase is used nine times in the Old Testament: Eze 26:20; Eze 31:14; Eze 31:16; Eze 31:18; Eze 32:18; Eze 32:24; Eze 26:20; Isa 44:12; and Psa 63:9. Dr.
Craven shows very clearly that in none of these cases can it designate merely the earth. He seems to establish the ground held by another class of commentators, that it signifies hades; by which we understand the unseen world of human disembodied spirits. Most of the above nine texts are, it will be seen, in Ezekiel, where the phrase is in our version freely translated hell. In the passage in Psalms the phrase figuratively designates the womb, as being the dark, semi-conscious hades of the unborn soul. For it was to a dim and obscure hades that good as well as bad expected to descend under the twilight of the old dispensation. See notes on Luk 16:22-23; Luk 23:43. That our Saviour, during his three days of burial, did visit in soul the region of spirits, is clear from his own statement to the dying thief, (Luk 23:43,) and from Peter’s words, (Act 2:27,) and, perhaps, from 1Pe 3:19.
The lowers or nethers of the earth (for the Greek word for parts is probably not genuine) means apparently the subterranean regions. Clearly in Greek and Roman paganism, Avernus, or the abodes of the spirits of the dead, was held to be beneath the earth’s surface. Both Homer and Virgil lead their heroes through the dark gates into the under world, where are Elysium and Tartarus, and where the good and the evil receive their due awards. No such full narrative or description is found in the Old Testament. And phrases like this might, perhaps, be explained on the principle of our note on Rom 10:7. To the ancients the heavens were a vast concave above, and the earth was a vast plain below, and the two made the great whole. God and angels were above in the heavens; man below; and hades still lower a descent into the silent shades, and so lower than the plane of which the earth’s surface is part, if not directly beneath the earth’s surface. And these rudimental conceptions, though immensely supplemented by science, are uncontradicted by science, and are still essentially true. The first half of the Eighth Psalm was as true to Newton as to David, with a stupendous amount of underlying meaning superadded. Addison, in the age of Kepler and Newton, paraphrased that psalm in the lines,
“The spacious firmament on high,
With all the blue ethereal sky,
And spangled heavens, a shining frame,
Their great Original proclaim.”
The poet knew that he was painting but an apparent surface of things, yet he knew that that visible or conceptual surface covers and stands for all the truths, regions, and objects underlying that surface, as discovered and revealed to us by astronomy. But see our note, next verse.
Dr. Craven, adopting an ancient but not primitive theory, supposes that Christ in his descent to hades bore the spirits of the saints up to the eternal heaven the abode of the glorified after the resurrection. From that view we dissent. We do suppose
1. That after Christ came, and even as his advent was drawing nigh, it began to be perceived that in the sphere of the disembodied there were not merely indiscriminate darkness and silence, but a paradise of real, yet incomplete bliss. Hence hades is in the New Testament, though really inclusive of the whole, yet usually applied only to the woful side of the spirit domain; just as the name America, though inclusive of the whole continent, is often applied to the United States alone. Usually, we say; yet probably in Act 2:27 hades includes both.
2 . That paradise is the name of the blessed side of the spirit-world until the second advent. Then, as death and hades will be merged in the lake of fire, (Rev 20:14,) so paradise will be merged in the final abodes of the blest. Rev 2:7; Rev 22:2.
3. That after the visit of Christ to hades, the third heaven and paradise were different, and not identical, is plain from 2Co 12:4, where see notes.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Now this “he ascended”, what does it indicate but that he also descended into the lower parts of the earth.’
Paul then takes the opportunity for a small digression in order to exalt Christ. He points out that for this Giver to have ascended there must first have been a descent, for the Psalmist was speaking of God. ‘The lower parts of the earth’ may simply indicate human birth (see Psa 139:15 where it may mean the womb or the Adamic birth from the dust of the ground) or the ground, possibly but not necessarily with some element of humiliation (Isa 44:23; Psa 71:20), and it would seem that Paul has in mind the incarnation. He is basically saying, ‘He Who was God descended’. Some however would see it as meaning His descent into the grave (Psa 63:9). There are no grounds here for suggesting that the raising of men from Hades is meant. Such a suggestion is pure speculation.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Eph 4:9-10. (Now, that he ascended, &c. St. Paul’s argumentation in these two verses is skilfully adapted to the main design of his Epistle. The convert Gentiles were attacked by the unconverted Jews, who were declared enemies to the thoughts of a Messiah who should die. St. Paul, to enervate that objection, proves, by a passage out of the Psalms, (Eph 4:8.) that he must die, and be buried. Besides the unbelieving Jews, several of those who were converted to the gospel, or at least professed to be so, attacked the Gentile converts on the other side, persuading them that they could not be admitted to be the people of God in the kingdom of the Messiah, nor receive any advantage by him, unless they were circumcised, and put themselves wholly under the Jewish constitution. He had said a great deal in the first three chapters to deliver them from this perplexity; but yet takes occasion here to offer them a new argument, by telling them, that Christ, the same Jesus that died, and was laid in his grave, was exalted to the right-hand of God, above all the heavens, in the highest state of dignity and power; thathe himself being filled bodily with the fulness of God, believers, who were allhis members, might receive immediately, from him their head, a fulness of gifts and graces, upon no other terms but as they were his members.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
is not a (Rabbinical) argument to show that the subject of the passage in the psalm is no other than Christ, in so far as of Him alone could be predicated that descending which, in speaking of ascending, must be presumed to have gone before (Michaelis, Koppe; Gder, von der Erschein
Eph 4:9
] carrying forward the argument: “but the , in order now to show you what is therewith said,” etc.
] not: the word , for this does not occur in the passage of the psalm, but the predicate , which was contained in .
] not: what of an extraordinary nature (Hoelemann), but simply: what is said therewith, what is implied in it? Comp. Mat 9:13 ; Joh 16:17 f., Joh 10:6 , al.
] that He also (not merely ascended, but also) descended . The having ascended presupposes the having descended. The correctness of this conclusion rests upon the admitted fact that the risen Christ had His original dwelling not upon earth, as Elijah had, but in the heaven, whither He went up; consequently He could not but have descended from this, if He has ascended. Comp. Joh 3:13 .
The depth , however, into which He descended whether, namely, merely to the earth, or deeper still into the subterranean world is not to be inferred from the itself, but was fixed with historic certainty in the believing consciousness of the readers; hence Paul could with good reason write not merely , but . , i.e. into that which is deeper down than the earth , into Hades ( , Hom. od. xxiii. 252; , Il. xxii. 482; comp. Od. xxiv. 204; Soph. Ant . 816, Trach . 1088). He might also have designated Hades by , the lowest depth of the earth ( , LXX. Psa 63:10 ; Prayer of Azar. 13; not Psa 139:15 , where “in the depths of the earth” is only a sensuous form of the conception “in secret”); but has purposely chosen that comparative expression in which the genitive is that of comparison, not the partitive genitive in order to impart as strong a colouring as possible to the depth of Hades, in contradiction to that heaven from which Christ descended; He descended deeper than the earth is (the earth being conceived of as a plane), in that He descended even into the sub terranean region beyond, into Hades. The goal of the humiliation Paul here designates locally , whereas at Phi 2:8 he specifies it as respects the degree , namely, by . . ., which, however, is as to substance in agreement with our passage, since the death of Christ had as its immediate consequence His descent into Hades (Luk 23:43 ; Mat 12:40 ; Act 2:27 ; 1Pe 3:19 ), as, indeed, also at Phi 2:10 ( ) this descent is presupposed as having taken place in death. The explanation of the so-called descent into hell (Irenaeus in Pitra, Spicileg. Solesmense , I. p. 7; Tertullian, Jerome, Pelagius, Ambrosiaster, Erasmus, Estius, Calovius, Bengel, and many others, including Rckert, Olshausen, Delitzsch, Lechler, Ewald, Hoelemann, Bleek; Baur scenting Gnosticism) is therefore the right one, [211] because the object was to present Christ as the One who fills the whole universe, so that, with a view to His entering upon this His all-filling activity, He has previously with His victorious presence passed through the whole world, having descended from heaven into the utmost depth , and ascended from this depth to the utmost height a view, which of necessity had to extend not merely to the earth, but even into the nether world , just because Christ, as was historically certain for every believer, had been in the nether world, and consequently, by virtue of His exaltation to the right hand of God, really had the two utmost limits of the universe, from below upwards, as the terminos a quo and ad quem of His triumphal progress. Further, had Paul intended only the descent to earth (Thomas, Beza, Calvin, Grotius, Hammond, Michaelis, Fischer, de vitiis Lex. N.T. , and many, including Winer, p. 470 [E. T. 666], Holzhausen, Meier, Matthies, Harless, Raebiger, p. 68 ff., Baumgarten-Crusius, de Wette, Hofmann, p. 345, Bisping, Schenkel, Schmid, Bibl. Theol . II. p. 291, Reiche, Comm. crit. p. 174 f., Beyschlag, Christol. d. N.T. p. 228), it would not be easy to see why he should not have written merely , or at any rate simply or (Act 2:19 ), instead of employing the circumstantial and affected, but yet only feebly paraphrasing expression: into the lower regions, which are the earth (for so we should have to explain , understood only of the earth; see Winer, l.c. [E. T. 666]). This expression is only accounted for, sharp and telling, when it points the reader to a region lower than the earth , to that Hades , whither every reader knew that Christ had descended. Doubtless the apostle might have written simply (Act 2:27 ) or (Mat 11:23 ), or also (Rom 10:7 ) or (Mat 12:40 ); but the whole pathos of the passage, with its contrast of the extremes of depth and height, very naturally suggested the purposely chosen designation . The ordinary objection, that, in fact, Christ did not ascend from Hades, but from earth to heaven, is of no effect, because He has in reality returned, arisen and ascended from Hades, consequently Hades was the deepest terminus a quo of His ascension, as it had previously been the deepest terminus ad quem of His descent, and on this deepest turning-point all here depended, even apart from the fact that the long interval of forty days between resurrection and ascension is historically very problematic (see Remark subjoined to Luk 24:51 ). Nearest to our view come Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Bullinger, Drusius, Zachariae, and others, who, however, refer the passage only to the death and the burial (comp. also Erlang. Zeitschr . 1856, p. 284); whereas Calomesius, Witsius, Calixtus, and others (already Beza, by way of suggestion), appealing to Psa 139:15 , strangely enough interpret it of the descent into the womb .
[210] The view of Chrysostom, Theophylact, Erasmus, Cornelius a Lapide, and others, again taken up by Olshausen (comp. also Hofmann, l.c. 343), that Paul would by the example of Christ exhort to humility , is quite at variance with the context. And Rckert also is wrong in holding that ver. 9 contains only an incidental remark, which might equally well have been wanting.
[211] Thomasius, II. p. 262, is still doubtful on the question; Kahnis, I. p. 508, regards it as preponderantly probable. Calvin called it inepta , and Reiche falsa .
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth?
Ver. 9. Into the lower parts ] That is, into his mother’s womb; according to Psa 139:15 ; “I was curiously wrought in the lowest parts of the earth,” i.e. in the womb, where God formed and featured me: like as curious workmen, when they have some choice piece in hand, they perfect it in private, and then bring it forth to light for men to gaze at.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
9 .] Further explanation of this text. But that He ascended ( . does not here mean, ‘ the word ’ , which does not occur in the text cited), what is it (does it imply) except that he also (as well) descended to the lower parts of the earth (the argument seems to be this: the Ascension here spoken of was not a first exaltation, but a return to heaven of one who dwelt in heaven , , . , Joh 3:13 , which is in fact the key to these verses. The ascent implied a previous descent . This is the leading thought. But it is doubted how far the words carry that descent, whether to earth merely, so that is the genitive of apposition, or to Hades , so that it is genitive of possession. Usage will not determine for 1) it is uncertain whether the Apostle meant any allusion to the corresponding Hebrew expression: 2) that expression is used both for Hades , Psa 63:9 , and for earth ( , LXX), Isa 44:23 (and for the womb , Psa 139:15 ). Nor can it be said (as Harl., Mey.) that the descent into hell would be irrelevant here or that our Lord ascended not from Hades but from the earth: for, the fact of descent being the primary thought, we have only to ask as above, how far that descent is carried in the Apostle’s mind. The greater the descent, the greater the ascent: and if the consisted of Satan and his powers, the warfare in which they were taken captive would most naturally be contemplated in all its extent, as reaching to their habitation itself: ‘this ascent, what does it imply but a descent, and that even to the lower parts of the earth from which the spoils of victory were fetched?’ And this meaning seems to be upheld by the which follows, as well as by the contrast furnished by . This interpretation is upheld by most of the ancients, Iren., Tert., Jer., Pelag., Ambrst.; also by Erasm., Est., Calov., Bengel, Rck., Olsh., Stier, Baur (uses it as a proof of the gnostic origin of the Epistle), Ellicott, al.: that of the Incarnation merely, descent on earth , by Beza, Calv., Grot., Schttg., Mich., Storr, Winer, Harl., B.-Crus., Meyer, De W., al.: that of Christ’s death (and burial), by Chr., Thdrt., c., al.: that corresponding to Psa 139:15 , by Beza (alt.), Witsius, al.)?
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Eph 4:9 . , , : Now this, “He ascended,” what is it but that He also descended [ first ] ? The TR inserts , with [389] [390] 3 [391] 3 [392] [393] [394] , most cursives, Syr., Vulg., Goth., Arm., etc. The omission of is supported by [395] [396] [397] [398] * [399] [400] , 17, Boh., Sah., Eth., etc. The documentary evidence is pretty fairly balanced. The preponderance, however, on the whole, is on the side of the omission, especially in view of transcriptional probabilities. The word is deleted by LTTr; while WH and RV give it a place in the margin. The has its usual transitional force, but with something added. It continues the thought, but does that in the form of an explanation or application; cf. Gal 2:2 ; Eph 5:3 ; see also Buttm., Gram. of N. T. Greek , p. 303; Winer.-Moult., p. 553. What the precise point of the quotation is, and what the explanation amounts to which is thus introduced, are questions of no small difficulty. The answer will appear when the particular terms have been examined. The clause , is not to be taken as if Paul were limiting himself to a play upon the word. What follows shows that he had in view the historical fact expressed in the , viz. , the Ascension. As in Mat 9:3 ; Joh 10:6 ; Joh 16:17 , the has the force of What does it mean? What is implied in the statement? And the reply given by Paul in is that the ascent presupposes a previous descent . This of course is not given as an inference of universal application, but as one that holds good in the case in view, and one which gives Paul the warrant to use the quotation as he does. In the Psalm it was Jehovah that ascended, but that was only after He had first descended to earth in behalf of His people from His proper habitation in heaven. And so the Giver of gifts to whom Paul desires to direct his readers was One who had first come down to earth before He ascended. It was the belief of those whom Paul addressed ( cf. the express statement in Joh 3:13 ) that Christ’s proper abode was in heaven. That belief is here taken for granted, and the conclusion consequently is drawn that the Giver who ascended is Christ. : into the lower parts of the earth . The locality or the extent of the descent is now defined. The question is whether the locality in view is this world as a scene of existence lower than heaven, or the under world as a deeper depth than earth itself. Does the sentence refer to Christ’s incarnation and the subjection to which He humbled Himself on earth even unto death? Or does it point to His descent to Hades? And if the latter is the case, in what aspect and with what particular significance is His visit to the world of the dead presented? On these questions there has been and there continues to be great diversity of opinion. Both interpretations have large support. That the “lower parts of the earth” mean simply earth itself in distinction from heaven is the view of Calv., Grot., Mich., Winer., Harl., Thom., Reiche, de Wette, Hofm., Beyschlag, Schweitzer, Weiss, Pfleid., Bisping, Abb., Haupt and others. That they mean Hades is the view favoured by the Copt. and Eth. Versions, and by such interpreters as Iren., Tertull., Jer., Erasm., Estius, Beng., Rck., Olsh., Del., Bleek, Mey., Alf., Ell. (on the whole), etc. Those who adopt this latter view, however, are not wholly at one. The great majority indeed, especially among Patristic and Lutheran exegetes, understand Paul to affirm that Christ after His death made a manifestation of Himself in triumph to the world of the departed, and fulfilled a certain ministry there. That ministry is understood by some, especially among the Fathers, to have been concerned with the release of the souls of OT saints from the Limbus Patrim ; by others, especially among certain classes of modern commentators, to have been a new proclamation of grace to the whole world of the departed or to certain sections of the dead; cf. Pearson on the Creed, sub Art. v.; Salmond’s Christian Doctrine of Immortality , p. 421, etc. But there are those, especially Calvinistic theologians, who take the writer to mean nothing more, if he refers to Hades at all, than that like other men Christ passed at death into the world of the departed and had experience there of the power of death for a time. Some ( e.g. , Chrys., Theod., Oec.) are of opinion that the phrase points to the death or the burial of Christ, but do not press it beyond that. On the other hand, there are those ( e.g. , Von Soden, Abb.) who take the descent to be to earth and not to Hades, but instead of identifying it with the incarnation regard it as subsequent to the ascension. What then is the most reasonable interpretation?
[389] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[390] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[391] Codex Ephraemi (sc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.
[392] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.
[393] Codex Angelicus (sc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.
[394] Codex Porphyrianus (sc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. Eph 2:13-16 .
[395] Autograph of the original scribe of .
[396] Autograph of the original scribe of .
[397] Codex Alexandrinus (sc. v.), at the British Museum, published in photographic facsimile by Sir E. M. Thompson (1879).
[398] Codex Ephraemi (sc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.
[399] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.
[400] Codex Boernerianus (sc. ix.), a Grco-Latin MS., at Dresden, edited by Matthi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis ( ) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.
It must be said in the first place that neither grammar nor textual criticism gives a decisive answer. The may be taken equally well as the appos. gen., = “the lower parts which are or make the earth”; the poss. gen., = “the lower parts belonging to earth,” Hades being conceived to be part of the earth, but its lower part; or the comp. gen., = “the parts lower than the earth”. But the comparative idea is not more pertinent to the one main line of interpretation than to the other. The may mean the parts lower than the earth itself, i.e. , Hades; but it may also mean the parts lower than heaven, i.e. , the earth. Nor does the variety in reading affect the sense, though much has been made of it. The word is inserted after by [401] [402] [403] [404] 3 [405] [406] [407] , Syr.-P., Boh., Vulg., Arm., Chrys., etc. It is omitted by [408] * [409] , Goth., Eth., Iren., etc. It must be held, therefore, to belong to the text, but it is not inconsistent with either interpretation. The main arguments in favour of Hades being in view are these; that if earth were meant, it is difficult to understand why some simpler form such as or (Act 2:19 ) was not chosen; that the use of so singular a phrase as , which recalls the LXX rendering for , one of the OT expressions for the underworld, suggests at once that something lower than earth itself, a yet deeper depth, was intended (Mey.); that the accompanying phrases and , being expressions of largest extension, make it reasonable to give the widest possible sense also to the ; and that justice is done to the peculiarity and the amplitude of the various expressions only by taking Paul’s idea to be that as Christ rose in order to fill the whole world, He had first to pass in His victorious power through all the great divisions of the universe heaven above, earth beneath, and even the subterranean world, in the assertion of His universal sovereignty. But there is much to be said on the other side. The superlative formula to, would have been more in point if the idea to be expressed had been that of a depth than which there was none deeper (Abb.), or that of a descent embracing all the several parts of the universe. In point of fact, too, it is not , but , that the LXX employs in reproducing the Hebrew . If Hades had been intended, it is strange that Paul did not select one or other of the more familiar and quite unambiguous phrases which are used elsewhere, e.g. , (Mat 11:23 ), (Act 2:27 ), or such a formula as (Mat 12:40 ), (Rom 10:7 ). It is also to be considered that, granting it is the Ascension and not merely the Resurrection of Christ that is expressed by the , it was not from Hades, but from earth that He did ascend. Further, the point immediately in view is not any work that Christ did in the world and its several parts, but the identity of the Person who descended, and ascended, and gave gifts. This is made sufficiently clear by the repeated (Eph 4:10-11 ), and the idea of a Hades-visit or a Hades-ministry has no obvious relation to that. The great paragraph in Phi 2:5-10 , which is in some sense a parallel, has also to be taken into account. There again the whole statement turns upon the two great ideas of the incarnation with the humiliation involved in it and the exaltation, and nothing is said about any visit of Christ to the underworld. Here, too, the whole idea of a descent to Hades appears to be foreign to the thought. It is not suggested by the passage in the Psalm; for there is not a word about Sheol in it. Neither is there any indication of it in the context in the Epistle. For there the bestowal of gifts is referred not to Christ’s descent, but to His ascension, and no hint is given of any work done by Him in Hades with a view to that bestowal, or of any relation in which the world of the dead stands to His prerogative of giving . For these reasons we conclude that the phrase means the earth as a scene of existence, lower than His native heavens, to which Christ descended.
[401] Codex Vaticanus (sc. iv.), published in photographic facsimile in 1889 under the care of the Abbate Cozza-Luzi.
[402] Codex Sinaiticus (sc. iv.), now at St. Petersburg, published in facsimile type by its discoverer, Tischendorf, in 1862.
[403] Codex Ephraemi (sc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.
[404] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.
[405] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.
[406] Codex Angelicus (sc. ix.), at Rome, collated by Tischendorf and others.
[407] Codex Porphyrianus (sc. ix.), at St. Petersburg, collated by Tischendorf. Its text is deficient for chap. Eph 2:13-16 .
[408] Codex Claromontanus (sc. vi.), a Grco-Latin MS. at Paris, edited by Tischendorf in 1852.
[409] Codex Boernerianus (sc. ix.), a Grco-Latin MS., at Dresden, edited by Matthi in 1791. Written by an Irish scribe, it once formed part of the same volume as Codex Sangallensis ( ) of the Gospels. The Latin text, g, is based on the O.L. translation.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
(Now . . . ascended = (Now this fact), He ascended.
what is it = what does it imply.
but = except. Greek. ei (App-118) me (App-105).
also descended = descended also.
lower parts. i.e. Hades. App-131.
earth. App-129.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
9.] Further explanation of this text. But that He ascended ( . does not here mean, the word , which does not occur in the text cited), what is it (does it imply) except that he also (as well) descended to the lower parts of the earth (the argument seems to be this: the Ascension here spoken of was not a first exaltation, but a return to heaven of one who dwelt in heaven- , , . , Joh 3:13, which is in fact the key to these verses. The ascent implied a previous descent. This is the leading thought. But it is doubted how far the words carry that descent, whether to earth merely, so that is the genitive of apposition,-or to Hades, so that it is genitive of possession. Usage will not determine-for 1) it is uncertain whether the Apostle meant any allusion to the corresponding Hebrew expression: 2) that expression is used both for Hades, Psa 63:9, and for earth (, LXX), Isa 44:23 (and for the womb, Psa 139:15). Nor can it be said (as Harl., Mey.) that the descent into hell would be irrelevant here-or that our Lord ascended not from Hades but from the earth: for, the fact of descent being the primary thought, we have only to ask as above, how far that descent is carried in the Apostles mind. The greater the descent, the greater the ascent: and if the consisted of Satan and his powers, the warfare in which they were taken captive would most naturally be contemplated in all its extent, as reaching to their habitation itself:-this ascent, what does it imply but a descent, and that even to the lower parts of the earth from which the spoils of victory were fetched? And this meaning seems to be upheld by the which follows, as well as by the contrast furnished by . This interpretation is upheld by most of the ancients, Iren., Tert., Jer., Pelag., Ambrst.; also by Erasm., Est., Calov., Bengel, Rck., Olsh., Stier, Baur (uses it as a proof of the gnostic origin of the Epistle), Ellicott, al.: that of the Incarnation merely, descent on earth, by Beza, Calv., Grot., Schttg., Mich., Storr, Winer, Harl., B.-Crus., Meyer, De W., al.: that of Christs death (and burial), by Chr., Thdrt., c., al.: that corresponding to Psa 139:15, by Beza (alt.), Witsius, al.)?
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Eph 4:9. , , Now this fact, namely, that He ascended) Paul proves that the language of the psalm is to be referred to Christ; and the ascension is inferred from the descent; Joh 3:13. All beheld the sojourn of the Son of God upon the earth: they ought, from this fact, to have believed His ascension, which they did not see. There is a similar mode of reasoning at Act 2:29, etc., Act 13:36-37; and especially at Heb 2:8-9. The humble characteristics predicated of the Messiah were fulfilled in Jesus; therefore the glorious things also predicated of the Messiah ought to be referred to Him.- , He first descended) Paul takes for granted the Deity of Christ; for those who are of the earth, although they did not previously descend, obtain the privilege of ascent.- ) not merely to the earth itself, but to the lowest parts of the earth [so that through all its depths nothing did He leave unvisited; comp. Eph 4:10.-V.g.] The highest heavens, or all the heavens, are opposed to the lowest parts of the earth, or to all parts of the earth. Christ, by His own power, took possession of all,-first of the earth, then of heaven. Men are joined with the mention of the earth; the captivity is joined with the mention of the lower parts.- , of the earth) in which men are.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Eph 4:9
Eph 4:9
(Now this,-These words introduce an explanatory statement of the correctness of the application of the preceding verse.
He ascended,-This implies a previous corresponding descent, which must be from heaven to earth, as Jesus said: And no one hath ascended into heaven, but he that descended out of heaven, even the Son of man, who is in heaven (Joh 3:13), and he could not ascend to give gifts to men without previously descending.
what is it but that he also descended into the lower parts of the earth?-The reference here is to the Messiah who came to earth from heaven, his original dwelling place, to destroy the power of the devil; to annihilate his kingdoms, cast out the evil spirit inseparable from them; reassert the authority of God, reestablish his rule and kingdom; make his Spirit again the life- giving and pervading influence of this world. When this work is accomplished, death will no longer riot on perishing mortals: those in the bondage of death will rise from their imprisoning graves; bitterness, wrath, strife will cease among men, then shall the prophecy of Isa 11:6-9 be fulfilled. This is to be the result of the reign of the kingdom of God on earth. The fullness of that reign and the rule of that Spirit will usher in the glorious millennial morn. Whoever, then, strives to reinstate Gods authority, Gods Spirit, Gods kingdom, and to destroy the authority, spirit, dominion, and institutions that have sprung up under the rule of the wicked one, is a coworker with God-with Jesus Christ, who also himself in like manner partook of the same; that through death he might bring to nought him that had the power of death, that is, the devil; and might deliver all them who through fear of death were all their lifetime subject to bondage. (Heb 2:14-15). And in destroying the devil with his institutions, and their fruits, he destroys the necessity and the cause of death-destroys death itself.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
he ascended: Pro 30:4, Joh 3:13, Joh 6:33, Joh 6:62, Joh 20:17, Act 2:34-36
he also: Gen 11:5, Exo 19:20, Joh 6:33, Joh 6:38, Joh 6:41, Joh 6:51, Joh 6:58, Joh 8:14, Joh 16:27, Joh 16:28
the lower: Psa 8:5, Psa 63:9, Psa 139:15, Mat 12:40, Heb 2:7, Heb 2:9
Reciprocal: Psa 71:20 – shalt bring 1Co 15:47 – the Lord Phi 2:10 – under Phi 2:29 – with
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
(Eph 4:9.) , , -Now that he ascended, what is it? Now this predicate, , what does it mean or imply? The particle introduces a transitional explanation or inference. The apostle does not repeat the participle, but takes the idea as expressed by the verb and as placed in contrast with –
[b ;-unless that He also descended to the lower parts of the earth. The word found in the Textus Receptus before has no great authority, but Reiche vindicates it (Com. Crit. p. 173); and is not found in D, E, F, G. Tischendorf rejects it, but Scholz, Lachmann, Tittmann, Hahn, and Reiche retain it, as it has A, B, C, D3, K, L, and the Vulgate in its favour. The Divinity and heavenly abode of Christ are clearly presupposed. His ascension implies a previous descent. He could never be said to go up unless He had formerly come down. If He go up after the victory, we infer that he had already come down to win it. But how does this bear upon the apostle’s argument? We can scarcely agree with Chrysostom, Olshausen, Hofmann, and Stier, that the condescension of Christ is here proposed as an example of those virtues inculcated in the first verse, though such a lesson may be inferred. Nor can we take it as being the apostle’s formal proof, that the psalm is a Messianic one-as if the argument were, descent and ascent cannot be predicated of God the Omnipresent; therefore the sacred ode can refer only to Christ who came down to earth and again ascended to glory. But the ascension described implies such a descent, warfare, and victory, as belong only to the incarnate Redeemer.
-to the lower parts of the earth. Compare in Septuagint such places as Deu 32:22; Neh 4:13; Psa 63:9-10; Psa 86:13; Psa 139:15; Lam 3:55, and the prayer of Manasseh in the Apocrypha. The phrase represents the Hebrew formula- 6, the superlative being commonly employed-. The rabbins called the earth sometimes generally . Bartolocci, Bib. Rab. i. p. 320.
1. Some suppose the reference to be to the conception of Jesus, basing their opinion on Psa 139:15, where the psalmist describes his substance as not hid from God, when he was made in secret, and curiously wrought in the lower parts of the earth. Such is the opinion of scholars no less distinguished than Colomesius, Observat. Sacrae, p. 36, Cameron, Myrothecium Evang. p. 251, Witsius, Piscator, and Calixtus. But the mere poetical figure in the psalm denoting secret and undiscoverable operation, can scarcely be placed in contrast to the highest heaven.
2. Chrysostom, with Theophylact and OEcumenius, Bullinger, Phavorinus, and Macknight, refer it to the death of Christ; while Vorstius, Baumgarten, Drusius, Cocceius, Whitby, Wilke, and Crellius, see a special reference to the grave. But there is no proof that the words can bear such a meaning. Certainly the descent described in the psalm quoted from did not involve such humiliation.
3. Many refer the phrase to our Lord’s so-called descent into hell-descensus ad inferos. Such was the view of Tertullian, Irenaeus, Jerome, Pelagius, and Ambrosiaster among the Fathers; of Erasmus, Estius, and the majority of Popish expositors; of Calovius, Bengel, Rckert, Bretschneider, Olshausen, Stier, Turner, Meyer in his third edition, Alford, and Ellicott. See also Lechler, das Apost. Zeit. p. 84, 2nd ed. 1857; Acta Thomae, xvi. p. 199, ed. Tischendorf, 1851. Thus Tertullian says, that Jesus did not ascend in sublimiora coelorum, until He went down in inferiora terrarum, ut illic patriarchas et prophetas compotes Sui faceret, De Anima, 55; Opera, vol. ii. p. 642, ed. OEhler. Catholic writers propose a special errand to our Lord in His descent into hell, viz., to liberate the old dead from torment-or a peculiar custody in the limbus patrum, or Abraham’s bosom. Catechismus Roman. 104. These doctrines are, however, superinduced upon this passage, and in many parts are contrary to Scripture. Pearson on the Creed, p. 292, ed. 1847. Stier admits that Christ could suffer no agony in Hades. Olshausen’s tamer idea is, that Jesus went down to Sheol, not to liberate souls confined in it, but that this descent is the natural consequence of His death. The author shrinks from the results of his theory, and at length attenuates his opinion to this-That in His descent Jesus partook of the misery of those fettered by sin even unto death, that is, even unto the depths of Hades. Such is also the view of Robinson (sub voce). But the language of the apostle, taken by itself, will not warrant those hypotheses. For, 1. Whatever the view taken of the descent into hell, or of the language in 1Pe 3:19, the natural interpretation of which seems to imply it, it may be said, that though the superlative may be the epithet of Sheol in the Old Testament, why should the comparative in the New Testament be thought to have the same reference? Is it in accordance with Scripture to call Hades, in this special sense, a lower portion of the earth, and is the expression analogous to Php 2:10; Mat 12:40 ? 2. The ascension of Jesus, moreover, as has been remarked, is always represented as being not from Hades but from the earth. Joh 3:13; Joh 16:28, et c. 3. Nor is there any force in Ellicott’s remark, that the use of the specific term would have marred the antithesis, for we find the same antithesis virtually in Isa 14:13; Isa 14:15, and expressly in Mat 11:23, while and are in sharp contrast on our hypothesis. But heaven and earth are the usual contrast. Joh 8:23; Act 2:19. And the phrase, that He might fill all things, depends not on the descent, but on the ascension and its character. 4. Those who suppose the captives to be human spirits emancipated from thraldom by Jesus, may hold the view that Christ went to hell to free them, but we have seen that the captives are enemies made prisoners on the field of battle. 5. Nor can it be alleged, that if Satan and his fiends are the captives, Jesus went down to his dark domain and conquered him; for the great struggle was upon the cross, and on it through death He destroyed him that had the power of death, that is, the devil. When He cried, It is finished, the combat was over. He commended His spirit into the hands of His Father, and promised that the thief should be with Himself in paradise-certainly not the scene of contention and turmoil. But if we adopt Hebrew imagery, and consider the region of death as a vast ideal underworld, into which Jesus like every dead man descends, there would then be less objection to the hypothesis under review. 6. If we suppose the apostle to have had any reference to the Septuagint in his mind, then, had he desired to express the idea of Christ’s descent into Hades, there were two phrases, any of which he might have imitated- (Psa 86:13); or more pointed still, . Deu 32:22. See Trom. Concord. Why not use , when it had been so markedly employed before, had he wished to give it prominence? Unmistakeable phraseology was provided for him, and sanctioned by previous usage. But the apostle employs with the comparative, and it is therefore to be questioned whether he had the Alexandrian version in his mind at all. And if he had, it is hard to think how he could attach the meaning of Hades to the words ; for in the one place where they occur (Psa 139:15), they describe the scene of the formation of the human embryo, and in the only other place where they are used (Psa 63:9), they mark out the disastrous fate of David’s enemies,-a fate delineated in the following verse as death by the sword, while the unburied corpses were exposed to the ravages of the jackal. Delitzsch in loc. Nor is there even sure ground for supposing that in such places as Isa 44:23, Eze 26:20; Eze 32:18-24, the similar Hebrew phrase which occurs, but which is not rendered in the Septuagint, means Sheol or Hades. In Isa 44:23, it is as here, earth in contrast with heaven, and perhaps the foundations of the globe are meant, as Ewald, the Chaldee, and the Septuagint understand the formula. In Eze 26:20 the low parts of the earth are places desolate of old; and in Eze 32:18-24 the nether parts of the earth are associated with the pit, and graves set in the sides of the pit-scenes of desolation and massacre. The phrase may be a poetical figure for a dark and awful destiny. It is very doubtful whether Manasseh in the prayer referred to deprecates punishment in the other world, for he was in a dungeon and afraid of execution, and, according to theocratic principles, might hope to gain life and liberty by his penitence; for, should such deliverance be vouchsafed, he adds, I will praise Thee for ever, all the days of my life. It is to be borne in mind, too, that in all these places of the Old Testament, the phraseology occurs in poetical compositions, and as a portion of Oriental imagery. But in the verse before us, the words are a simple statement of facts in connection with an argument, which shows that Jesus must have come down to earth before it could be said of Him that He had gone up to heaven.
4. So that we agree with the majority of expositors who understand the words as simply denoting the earth. Such is the view of Thomas Aquinas, Beza, Aretius, Bodius, Rollock, Calvin, Cajetan, Piscator, Crocius, Grotius, Marloratus, Schoettgen, Michaelis, Bengel, Loesner, Vitringa, Cramer, Storr, Holzhausen, Meier, Matthies, Harless, Wahl, Baumgarten-Crusius, Scholz, de Wette, Raebiger, Bisping, Hofmann, Chandler, Hodge, and Winer, 59, 8, a. A word in apposition is sometimes placed in the genitive, as 2Co 5:5, -the earnest of the Spirit-the Spirit which is the earnest; Rom 8:23; Rom 4:11, -the sign of circumcision, that is, the sign, to wit, circumcision. Act 4:22; 1Pe 3:7; Col 3:24; Rom 8:21, etc. The same mode of expression occurs in Hebrew-Stuart’s Heb. Gram. 422; Nordheimer’s do. 815. So, too, we have in Latin-Urbs Romae-the city of Rome; fluvius Euphratis-or as we say in English, the Frith of Clyde, or Frith of Forth. Thus, in the phrase before us, the lower parts of the earth mean those lower parts which the earth forms or presents in contrast with heaven, as we often say-heaven above and earth beneath. The of the former verse plainly suggested the in this verse, and stands also in correspondence with it. So the world is called . Act 2:19. When our Lord speaks Himself of His descent and ascension, heaven and earth are uniformly the termini of comparison. Thus in Joh 3:13, and no less than seven times in the sixth chapter of the same gospel. Comparantur, says Calvin, non una pars terrae cum altera, sed tota terra cum coelo. Reiche takes the genitive, as signifying terra tanquam universi pars inferior. Christ’s ascension to heaven plainly implies a previous descent to this nether world. And it is truly a nether or lower world when compared with high heaven. May not the use of the comparative indicate that the descent of Christ was not simply to , but ? Not that with Zanchius, Bochart (Opera, 1.985, ed. Villemandy, 1692), Fesselius (Apud Wolf., in loc.), Kttner, Barnes, and others, we regard the phrase as signifying, in general, lowliness or humiliation-status exinanitionis. Theologically, the use of the comparative is suggestive. He was born into the world, and that in a low condition; born not under fretted roofs and amidst marble halls, but He drew His first breath in a stable, and enjoyed His first sleep in a manger. As a man, He earned His bread by the sweat of His brow, at a manual occupation with hammer and hatchet, going forth to His work and to His labour until the evening. The creatures He had formed had their house and haunt after their kind, but the Heir of all things had no domicile by legal right; for the foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man hath not where to lay His head. Reproach, and scorn, and contumely followed Him as a dark shadow. Persecution at length apprehended Him, accused Him, calumniated Him, scourged Him, mocked Him, and doomed the man of sorrows to an ignominious torture and a felon’s death. His funeral was extemporized and hasty; nay, the grave He lay in was a borrowed one. He came truly to the lower parts of the earth.
Fuente: Commentary on the Greek Text of Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians and Phillipians
Eph 4:9-10. These verses are a break into the direct line of thought that the apostle is discussing. However, are related to it in that they show the importance of Him of whom so much is being said. Having just referred to the ascension of Jesus, the apostle deems it well to say a few words about that subject. There have been two persons who have ascended to Heaven before: Enoch (Gen 5:24) and Elijah (2Ki 2:1 2Ki 2:11). But these persons were natural men prior to their ascension, hence that experience would not prove them to be divine. Paul at once meets that situation by declaring that this one who was said to have ascended, had before that time descended, and of necessity we would understand the descension to have been from the same place to which he afterwards ascended, which was Heaven, and that proves the divine origin and character of Jesus. Lower parts of the earth. Some explain this to mean the grave; it could not mean Hades since that is no part of the earth. Others teach that it refers to the lowly state which Jesus took upon himself and the humble life that he lived. I believe the statement embraces all of these and any other facts that were true of His stay on this earth. As proof that Paul has these great facts in mind, I will use the space to quote as follows: “Who, being in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be equal with God. But made himself of no reputation, and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men. And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross” (Php 2:6-8). The first half of the tenth verse virtually repeats the statement of the preceding one, and then adds the phrase above all heavens. Since the heavens were all created by Christ in cooperation with God, it follows that in going back to his Father, Jesus would be raised above those things he had assisted in making. Fill all things is said in the sense of fulfilling all things that He had promised to do, including the bestowal of the Comforter (promised in Joh 14:16) to give to the apostles miraculous power, and the work of conferring spiritual gifts upon others, which gifts will be discussed soon.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Eph 4:9. It is not necessary to regard Eph 4:9-10 as parenthetical.
Now introduces an explanatory statement, not a proof, of the correctness of the application of Eph 4:8.
That he ascended, i.e., the fact that He ascended, not the word, since the form here differs from that in Eph 4:8.
What is it, what does it imply, but that he also descended. It is assumed, since the reference in the Old Testament is to God, and here to the Messiah, that heaven is the point of departure and place of return for Him who is spoken of. This is the original dwelling place of Christ (Joh 3:13), and He could not ascend to give gifts to men without previously descending. But whither? Paul says, into the lower parts of the earth. It is quite grammatical to explain this as, the lower parts, namely, the earth, and this is all that is necessarily involved in what precedes. But the contrast with Eph 4:10, and the evident design to show the power of Christ, favors the view, held by ancient expositors and a number of recent commentators, that the Apostle refers to Christs descent into Hades. Either view is doctrinally admissible and grammatically defensible; probably the more ancient one is preferable, if it be guarded against unwarrantable inferences. The other explanations, referring the phrase to lowliness, to burial, to the womb of the Virgin, especially the first, must be regarded as untenable.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 9
Into the lower parts of the earth; into the grave.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
4:9 (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the {h} lower parts of the earth?
(h) Down to the earth, which is the lowest part of the world.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
In Eph 4:9-11 Paul commented on the meaning of "ascended" and "gave" in his citation.
For Christ to have ascended to heaven He first had to descend to "the lower parts of the earth." This is probably a reference to Jesus’ grave (genitive of possession) [Note: Hoehner, "Ephesians," p. 634; Simpson, p. 92.] rather than to the earth (genitive of apposition) [Note: John Eadie, Commentary on the Epistle to the Ephesians, pp. 293-95; Abbott, pp. 115-16; A. T. Lincoln, Ephesians, pp. 242-48; W. Hall Harris III, "The Ascent and Descent of Christ in Eph 4:9-10," Bibliotheca Sacra 151:602 (April-June 1994):198-214; Robertson, 4:536; Martin, p. 1310.] or to Hades (genitive of comparison) [Note: Richard C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistles to the Galatians to the Ephesians and to the Philippians, pp. 521-22.] in view of the context. In His death Jesus Christ gained the victory over sin, and He redeemed those whom He would give as gifts to the church.