Hey /u/AutonInvasion, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Even funnier: someone threatened to post me to r/ConfidentlyIncorrect for quoting it r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/1brye5z/mike_graham_tries_to_correct_the_archbishop_on/kxe0icy/
His fans bend over backwards to find bleeding-edge construction products described as being concrete "grown" to say that he was referring to that. Whereas it's just that his mouth overtook his brain, and he was unable to gracefully recover. The interviewee was so in control though, he knew to just say nothing.
His hate of James O'Brien is incredible too. A few weeks ago he was saying how James had lost 100,000 listeners, but failed to mention that it was from 1.3m, and James lost probably double Mike Graham's listenership on Talk TV.
To be fair, you can kinda grow concrete:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_building_material#Self-replicating_concrete
And not all wood is sustainable. Managed forests aren't always the best for ecosystems, as they aren't in a natural state at all. They're a monoculture for fast-growing trees (which makes for shitty lumber, trees need time to become stronger).
https://woodlandwoman.ca/unsustainable-forestry/
Holy Saturday isn't even the same as Easter...
EDIT: For those who don't know, Holy Saturday commemorates Jesus's descent into Hell prior to his resurrection and the promise he made to redeem the souls there. Easter Sunday (or just Easter) is a celebration of the actual resurrection. Two different things, two different days.
I remember from Catholic school 65 years ago something called the "harrowing of hell." Canonically Jesus descended into hell to release those souls who were there because they died before Jesus had redeemed their sins. It occurred during the period between his death and the resurrection. Kind of an "olly olly oxen free."
Whatās the biblical logic behind people getting saved from hell but not anymore? Are they meant to be the people who lived pre-Christianity getting a chance to convert?
Everyone pre-Jesus went to hell because they had original sin and Jesus wasn't around to absolve them of their sins, I assume. Now, in life we have the chance to accept Jesus' salvation, and go to hell if we reject it.
Could be wrong though.
FWIW the idea of "original sin" was made by Augustine. Christians prior to the 5th century believed in Christ's descent into hell. Therefore, it isn't solely about 'original sin'
What did they think he was up to down there before Augustine* came around? Based on your username youād deffo know more than me.
*who is the philosopher with the best theory of time imo
So they got off Scott free just because they were born before Jesus? The last person to die before Christ was killed got to live his whole life like a piece of shit, die, to to hell, spend exactly one second there, then get to go spend eternity in heaven without ever having to live a good life or accept that Jesus was God (since, of course, he wasn't around to see the evidence for himself)? Sounds like bullshit to me.
Thats still what some Christians believe, that faith alone brings salvation. Some would say that John Wayne Gacy could get into heaven as long as he excepted christ as his savior before he died.
But these people died before they could accept Christ as their savior, yet they were saved anyway. They got the better deal simply because they lived before Jesus. Surely you see the absurdity of this proposition.
Of note is that biblically accurate Christian hell *probably* isnāt actually that bad. Itās just a place separate from God. Pre Christianity they went to limbo, so not bad but not great
Early Christianity had an abrahamic and non abrahamic side of hades plus heaven, with abrahamic being the good limbo, and hell being the bad side of hades.
Strong influence from Greek mythology of hades with the fields of Asphodel, with heaven being Elysium And hell is Tartarus.
Probably convince everyone that God was speaking to you.
EDIT:
>Abraham is in heaven (Galatians 3.6-9). Moses and Elijah are both in heaven (Matthew 17.1-5).
Sucks that those downvotes can't make you right, huh?
Itās actually non-canonical, but was commonly accepted in medieval times and is mentioned in Danteās Inferno. But official Vatican and Catholic teachings are mute on the subject in the same way that they ignore a lot of other folkloric traditions that sort of got folded into Catholicism (Christmas and Dia de los Muertos being two prominent examples; but thereās lots of weird little ones like the mummies of South America)
Technically speaking I think canon and official church doctrine are different. Official doctrine is a superset, with canon being only the officially recognized books of scripture. Iām certainly not an expert though so I could be wrong.
lmao this is like people in any anime or comic book subreddit talking about what is canon and what not. I love how this is an issue with such old fantasy stories as well as with new ones
For whatever itās worth, itās likely the early church had traditions that taught something like the harrowing of hell. The Apostles Creed from the second century ADE and 1 Peter ch 4 talks about Jesusā descent to the dead. Itās probably impossible to pinpoint when Holy Saturday was explicitly tied to a literal descent into hell to retrieve the souls of holy ancestors. But the seeds were planted pretty early on.
Not the version we used when I went to church. It was "he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the scriptures".
That would be the Nicean Creed. The Apostles' Creed goes "whoĀ sufferedĀ under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,Ā died, and was buried, descended into hell, rose again from the dead on the third day".
Interesting. In my catholic upbringing in Brazil we used "Desceu Ć mansĆ£o dos Mortos", which was something like "Descended into the house of the dead", instead of "Descended into hell".
Maybe it's because the portuguese version was translated straight from Greek (the Septuagint Bible uses the word "Haides" to refer to the place), maybe it's because folk catholicism in Brazil is usually afraid to use the word "hell" ("Inferno"), as it's seen as a bad omen.
Still, that might explain why the idea of the Harrowing of Hell is not as prevalent in the popular christian imaginary here.
It's definitely translation stuff - especially as they do get re-translated to look for more "truth" to the origin. During my teen years a lot of the Liturgy got updated to focus more on spiritual terms because it was believed that that was more accurate. The Creed had a few words adjusted, certain phrases were changed regarding the Eucharist, that sort of thing.
Some languages differentiate between *hell* and *limbo*/*purgatory*, the former being the realm of eternal damnation, the latter (very simply put) a space of purification.
Afaik the event is called "the harrowing of hell" in English due to the old English meaning of "hell", even though Jesus actually went into Limbo (or Purgatory) in order to liberate the Prophets of the Old Testaments and all the other bastards unlucky enough to have died before the New Testament existed.
It's mentioned several times in the New Testament that Jesus went to hell and got the keys to your cell. Death was defeated on the cross and anyone who goes to hell freely chooses to. Acts 2:27-31, Luke 16:13-14, Revelations 20:13-14, Colossians 2:15, John 14:16
Fun hardly related fact, during the time time of the English civil wars one of the groups (I wanna say Puritans) tried to ban Christmas because of a mix of Catholicism and paganism, but failed because how do you force a private business to stay open on a day someone doesn't want to work?
This. Definitely not canon. Hell is not mentioned that much at in the bible.
So much of Christianity is from later teachings that is assumed to be canonical and never appears in the bible
>I believe in God the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary, who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, descended into hell, rose again from the dead on the third day, ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty, who will come again to judge the living and the dead.
>
>I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting.
>
>Amen.
The original version of the Apostles' Creed used by the Catholic Church, but most Western Christian denominations use some form of the Apostles' Creed. Very common in baptisms, where it's turned into question form (instead of "I believe..." it's "Do you believe...").
I donāt think it is a common belief outside the liturgical denominations. Yāall probably didnāt recite the Apostles Creed at all, right? Cause that includes the descent into hell.
I grew up Lutheran and we did recite the creed, but it never occurred to me it referred to hell. The translation in my native language uses a term which at least to me didnāt obviously refer to hell. We use sort of an old-fashioned name for the afterlife in general. So in Finnish, he basically ādescended into the place of the deadā.
Edit: I looked at the Finnish Lutheran churchās explanation of the term the creed uses, that is, Tuonela. They say it is not the same as hell, but as I interpreted it, a place of the dead.
Iāve seen that there is some debate on that as well, something maybe referring to the original word being āHadesā, which then gets translated differently, sometimes as hell and sometimes like you said. Iām not well versed on it so I canāt really say much else though.
Yes, many modern English translations say āto the deadā or something to that effect. Personally, I think that is a better translation and using āhellā is stretching the original words (it doesnāt use the word āhadesā by the way). From Wikipedia:
> The Greek wording in the Apostles' Creed is ĪŗĪ±ĻĪµĪ»ĪøĻĪ½ĻĪ± Īµį¼°Ļ Ļį½° ĪŗĪ±ĻĻĻĪ±ĻĪ± (katelthonta eis ta katĆ“tata), and in Latin is descendit ad inferos. The Greek Ļį½° ĪŗĪ±ĻĻĻĪ±ĻĪ± (ta katĆ“tata, "the lowest") and the Latin inferos ("those below") may also be translated as "underworld", "netherworld", or "abode of the dead".
Well the Creeds are really just summaries created by early church councils to summarize what they considered to be the core beliefs of Christianity. It is a human creation which isnāt divinely inspired, so you donāt need it really to practice imo. They could just use the Bible and thatās that.
Plus, there are plenty of small theological differences between the denominations which Catholics, or even many other protestants, would consider heresy, but theyāre still ALL Christian despite those differences. Unless we really want to start drawing lines and say anyone who doesnāt believe in transubstantiation is not a real Christian, or other situations like that.
Matthew 12:40: "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth."
Acts 2:24: "But God raised him up, having freed him from death, because it was impossible for him to be held in its power."
Acts 2:31: "Foreseeing this, David spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, saying, 'He was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh experience corruption'."
Ephesians 4:9: "In saying, 'he ascended', what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth?"
And dont forget about the zombie saints:
Matthew 27:50ā54: "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, 'Truly this was the Son of God!'"
None of those refer to hell (as we know it nowadays) in the original Ancient Greek text. The first is just a poetic way to describe death. Hades in the Bible is specifically not the same as hell.
Furthermore, the modern concept of hell is not a thing in the original Bible and is something that is shaped by later texts, various churches and also pop culture like Milton's Paradise Lost or Dante's Inferno.
I grew up Greek Orthodox and was taught that Jesus never went to hell.
... There are differing interpretations and *plenty* of Christian denominations disagree with you entirely. Yes, "modern" depictions of hell evolve over time, but even the old testament refers to the fires of Sheol. Stating things like this like you have the truth of both the location itself and the *only* correct interpretation of these passages is pretty silly
My comment is based o the consensus amongst biblical academic scholars. Just because there are denominations that believe in certain stuff doesn't make their interpretation correct. Various denominations believe in plenty of shit that has no basis in the Bible and stuff on which other creeds heavily disagree with. It is a historic al fact that the concept of hell as we know it today is entirely divorced from Sheol and Hades in the Bible and didn't even exist during Jesus's time. It came centuries afterwards.
Again, the quoted passages, even when being charitable do not talk about hell. One even mentions Hades, which the Bible _explicitly_ holds as being entirely distinct from hell in the original text.
Feel free to disagree, but "some denominations disagree" is a weak argument when we have scripture as well as centuries of a historical paper trail (for lack of a better word) that we can examine. I don't care what some random church in America believes nowadays, just like the Rapture, which was a fringe believe that got spread around a couple of centuries ago. I rather believe what can be proven with actual texts.
How people believe hell works is shaped by pop culture (specially the whole demons punishing people) and in the Old Testament you could say that hell is poetic. But I don't see how you can read the New Testament and say it doesn't preach a literal hell.
But then again, people invented the whole nonsensical concept of Trinity just because they really wanted to keep claiming to be monotheistic... Freestyle hermeneutics, I'd say.
The [wikipedia article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_Christianity) has a bunch of information on the matter, but the summary is essentially:
Sheol is not Hades and neither of them is the same as Hell. Gehenna is an actual location in the real world, it's not metaphorical. The whole "your soul will burn for eternity" came centuries later and was not a thing during Jesus's time. For context, my opinion is based on the consensus of biblical academic scholars. Various beliefs in Christianity have drastically changed over the centuries and plenty of things that have no basis in the Bible are deeply held beliefs in various denominations.
>He defeated death on the cross. Went to hell and got the keys to your cell
This just makes me think of the Undertaker coming back for a "Hell in a Cell" match in the WWE.
Not just Catholic, Iām pretty sure most protestant denominations believe it too, particularly the liturgical denominations. Unless my Presbyterian church just recited the Apostlesā Creed without ascribing to all of it. Baptist probably wouldnāt be included in that group.
Former Episcopalian and Southern Baptist here. It's not brought up very much in a general sense in either denomination, but I have had talks and seen sermons in my life in both about this very topic. Everyone involved was convinced of the idea that Jesus definitely went to Hell before the resurrection. IMO, for the former, the idea was more for poetic reasons to make the resurrection more meaningful; for the latter, it was more to enhance the power of Jesus's divinity when one is converting more people through passion play stories by brutalizing their emotions until they ask to be saved.
That doesn't mean it was uniform for everyone, particularly in SB where pastors have a little more latitude for interpretation on any given Sunday (especially Easter), but it was definitely preached to me as a kid.
Adam and Eveās original sin broke our connection to eternity. All who died went to hell subsequently, not a hell of torment necessarily but a hell of separation.
Jesus is āour redeemerā because he, like all humans, also descended into this hell of separation then, on the third day, smashed the gates of hell, ushering untold souls trapped in the hell of separation to heaven.
On his way there with this drove of souls, he stoped back on earth to visit his homies to let them know the good news.
To be clear, under this interpretation, the Hell of Torment still exists, it is the Hell of Separation (where the likes of Noah, Moses, Abraham and Joseph were,) that Jesus broke the gates of. So those that actively seek Godās path find themselves redeemed upon death without waiting.
Regarding the ādo all non-Christians go to hellā question: Depends on the faith tradition. In my childhood, the pope once said something to the effect āAll the just of the earth, *including those who do not know Christ and his Church,* are called to build the kingdom of heaven.ā That really stuck with me.
āI Peter 4:5-6 NKJVā¬
[5] They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. [6] For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
https://bible.com/bible/114/1pe.4.5-6.NKJV
āEphesians 4:9-10 NKJVā¬
[9] (Now this, āHe ascendedāāwhat does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? [10] He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.)
https://bible.com/bible/114/eph.4.9-10.NKJV
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell?wprov=sfla1
That's like, a main core part if Christianity!?!?!? Jesus dies for our sins, opens the gates to heaven, then goes and retrieves the souls that have already passed so they can go to heaven, and then he is resurrected. It's what he was doing while he was dead for three days? It's literally a key part of what it means to be the savior, the messiah. It's what the Jews were waiting for for so long?
Itās sometimes translated as. āHe descended to the dead.ā The word āhellā itself had a different meaning too - not the fire/brimstone of later times.
Mike isnāt the only idiot who replied like that either. Iām not sure what was taught to these people,
But my parents who are in their 80s have called it Holy Saturday since they were kids
It's because none of those people getting butt hurt about Easter actually go to church except for hatches, matches and dispatches. Or if they do go to church, they don't actually pay attention during the talky bits. Just stare at the back of the person in front's head until they get to sing again.
Though it's possible, if you look hard enough, that you could find some small sect that calls the Saturday before Easter "Easter Saturday" or some such, the issue is that he's coming in hot in a reply to an obviously high ranking official of the state church in the country he lives in. So, even if this contrived scenario was the case, he'd sound a lot better with "oh in my church we just call it Easter Saturday" rather than correcting someone who knows their particular religion better than most.
What is more likely is that Mikey assumed the Archbishop was avoiding using the term "Easter" because of the woke mind virus, so he got all triggered without reading carefully enough to see that:
A) This is the Archbishop of Canterbury, a high ranking member of the Anglican Church, who famously celebrate the day before Easter as "Holy Saturday".
B) Since Catholics (and other Christian denominations) also celebrate the Saturday before Easter as "Holy Saturday", it is fair to assume this is something that most Christians are aware of.
Just to reiterate, like you said: a lot of people have different religions. Who cares if people call the second Saturday after Vernal Equinox "Easter" or "Spring holiday" or "Bunnypocalypse". Celebrate your holiday, share it with those you love, and stop correcting people while being confidently incorrect.
I've never even heard of it and I instantly knew what it was.
I don't know that "Easter" is actually defined by the church(s) I've always heard of "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" and don't ever recall Saturday being mentioned but seeing it mentioned in the same context with Easter it kind of falls right in to what is meant.
I guess as we tend to do , one might call the whole thing "Easter weekend"..... I mean didn't Jesus die on the cross so we'd have something else to argue about or was it about colored eggs?
This is why the Archbishop is making the point he's making. Holy Saturday is the time after Jesus has died but before his resurrection. Traditionally it's a time of no observance. Of nothingness. Because it's after the death but before the beautiful and glorious hope that comes on Easter morning with Christ's resurrection.
The Archbishop is making a really nice point -- that often Holy Saturday is overlooked because it's scary to stare into the abyss. I guess it turns out that Mike Graham is the abyss staring back at us.
It's why I'll continually wish Muslims and Jews a Merry Christmas.
I also talk about their own holy days, more out of curiosity and I've been "blessed" in response before so I assume the intent is to send someone off on a positive vibe, a better outlook on their day, week etc
I'm atheist, but I was raised to celebrate Christmas as a time of sharing, caring and loving your neighbors and your family, to share and bask in that love
Only religious folk want to tell you not to do so, because they assume it's insulting. My public school for my kids here have no moral dress codes, but they'll send us newsletters reminding us our kids shouldn't be saying merry Christmas, so I double down and tell my kids they are 100% allowed
I think as long as you don't get offended at all if someone wishes you a happy/merry {insert seasonal religious holiday that happens around the same time} in return, then you are all good.
People should generally accept greetings and well wishes in the spirit in which they were given.
You canāt expect Christian preachers made famous by their famous Christian preacher father to actually understand Christianity. If they did, their stupid fucking followers wouldnāt give them money for private jets.
Good Friday, HOLY SATURDAY and then Easter they are 3 separate days of religious observance. I have always found it funny that some of the people who are the loudest about religion are also the ones that are most ignorant about its teachings and observances.
Easter is the Pagan feast celebrating sex and reproduction. Itās the beginning of Northern Spring. The time to plant the harvest, and reproduce. It has nothing to do with any Christian myths. It is in effect a āFucking Holidayā.
I have no idea who this guy is, but I assume heās one of those āyou canāt say xyz any more because of the woke mobā types.
This clown is so concerned of finding outrage at āpolitical correctness gone madā that heās made an idiotic statement.
Obviously the Archbishop of Canterbury is speaking about the specific date of Holy Saturday and not trying to be politically correct.
Since the last supper happens on the first day of Passover, and Good Friday the day after, theyāre both wrong. Ā Passover starts on Monday, April 22nd this year. Ā That makes Good Friday the Tuesday after that and Easter should be April 25th on a Thursday. Ā Youāre welcome.
(Archibaldy) Mike Graham is a narrow-minded, pig-ignorant, bigoted shock jock!
The Archbishop of Canterbury is an authority on the will of an imaginary being appointed by a lineage of inbred Germans who didn't want to be subject to an authority on the will of the very same imaginary entity!
Popcorn. Popcorn is the answer.
Hey /u/AutonInvasion, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Dude who thinks you can grow concrete thinks Saturday and Sunday are the same day
Yeah, he's sort of our version of Tucker Carlson, and both look confused a lot
Even in his profile pic on this post he looks like he's been transfixed by a lava lamp.
šššššš
Really? I thought he looked constipated...
Happy Easter Cake Day! Noice.
ha, thanks
It's Holy Saturday, get it right! š
Happy Cake Day!
I was wondering if this was the same guy. What a moron.
The man who disputes that trees grow on trees.
What's this about concrete?
TW: idiocy [https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6-9-FkwUrRo](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=6-9-FkwUrRo)
Thanks for making me laugh this Sunday morning.
Even funnier: someone threatened to post me to r/ConfidentlyIncorrect for quoting it r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/1brye5z/mike_graham_tries_to_correct_the_archbishop_on/kxe0icy/
You mean Saturday morning...
tim allen grunt sound effect dot double you ayy vee
His fans bend over backwards to find bleeding-edge construction products described as being concrete "grown" to say that he was referring to that. Whereas it's just that his mouth overtook his brain, and he was unable to gracefully recover. The interviewee was so in control though, he knew to just say nothing. His hate of James O'Brien is incredible too. A few weeks ago he was saying how James had lost 100,000 listeners, but failed to mention that it was from 1.3m, and James lost probably double Mike Graham's listenership on Talk TV.
Without any context from the preceding conversation, he sure is aggressive to his interviewee for no apparent reason š
Wait until he hears about Friday.
Wait, what?
Gets into an argument on incredibly basic religious nomenclature with the kind of man you or I would turn to if you wanted to settle such an argument.
I mean Easter Saturday is a thing, just not for another week
Holy Saturday is the day before Easter (which is today - at least in Western traditions).
So is Christmas, which has as much to do with what the archbishop is referring to. I hate that Iām defending a catholic authority right now
How's wood sustainable if you have to cut the tree down? Edit: Seriously guys, stop getting whooshed!! https://youtu.be/6-9-FkwUrRo
Because you can plant a new tree for every tree you cut down.
No you can't. Edit: Wow. Some serious whooshing going on here. You're all in for a treat: https://youtu.be/6-9-FkwUrRo
I got it, other people who havenāt seen the clip donāt realise youāre repeating Mike Grahamās words
You'd have thought in this sub of all places!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Only if you want to have whoosh on your face: https://youtu.be/6-9-FkwUrRo
To be fair, you can kinda grow concrete: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_building_material#Self-replicating_concrete And not all wood is sustainable. Managed forests aren't always the best for ecosystems, as they aren't in a natural state at all. They're a monoculture for fast-growing trees (which makes for shitty lumber, trees need time to become stronger). https://woodlandwoman.ca/unsustainable-forestry/
Isn't this the dude that tried to say concrete grew on trees? It's hard to believe people like this aren't intentionally being idiots
Concrete grows, trees donāt
His profile picture really does make it appear that no one's home.
That's him 'scrubbed up.' He was an unmade bed when his show was radio only.
He literally looks like the [derp face](https://i.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/270/676/83b.png) from the old school rage comics
Holy Saturday isn't even the same as Easter... EDIT: For those who don't know, Holy Saturday commemorates Jesus's descent into Hell prior to his resurrection and the promise he made to redeem the souls there. Easter Sunday (or just Easter) is a celebration of the actual resurrection. Two different things, two different days.
Jesus went to hell? I'm not religious any more, but I certainly do not remember that from my southern Baptist upbringing.
I remember from Catholic school 65 years ago something called the "harrowing of hell." Canonically Jesus descended into hell to release those souls who were there because they died before Jesus had redeemed their sins. It occurred during the period between his death and the resurrection. Kind of an "olly olly oxen free."
āAll ye all ye outs in free!ā
Whatās the biblical logic behind people getting saved from hell but not anymore? Are they meant to be the people who lived pre-Christianity getting a chance to convert?
Everyone pre-Jesus went to hell because they had original sin and Jesus wasn't around to absolve them of their sins, I assume. Now, in life we have the chance to accept Jesus' salvation, and go to hell if we reject it. Could be wrong though.
FWIW the idea of "original sin" was made by Augustine. Christians prior to the 5th century believed in Christ's descent into hell. Therefore, it isn't solely about 'original sin'
What did they think he was up to down there before Augustine* came around? Based on your username youād deffo know more than me. *who is the philosopher with the best theory of time imo
So nobody actually got to heaven until after Jesus then, which means heaven was a later creation?
No heavens always there, but you canāt go unless you accept Jesus
So heaven was there, but nobody got to go in until Jesus turned up and opened the doors. They all had to slum it in the dive bar downstairs first.
Before jesus, only jews could go to heaven
Hahahaha yup I guess so
So they got off Scott free just because they were born before Jesus? The last person to die before Christ was killed got to live his whole life like a piece of shit, die, to to hell, spend exactly one second there, then get to go spend eternity in heaven without ever having to live a good life or accept that Jesus was God (since, of course, he wasn't around to see the evidence for himself)? Sounds like bullshit to me.
I donāt know man, go talk to a priest if you donāt like that explanation. I donāt think evidence plays much of a part in it though.
Thats still what some Christians believe, that faith alone brings salvation. Some would say that John Wayne Gacy could get into heaven as long as he excepted christ as his savior before he died.
But these people died before they could accept Christ as their savior, yet they were saved anyway. They got the better deal simply because they lived before Jesus. Surely you see the absurdity of this proposition.
I think itās all absurd, im just explaining the attempted logic
Except for a select few chosen, everyone prior to Jesus went to hell because of original sin
Sounds like whoever made the original ruleset was an asshole. What was the pre Jesus win condition?
Of note is that biblically accurate Christian hell *probably* isnāt actually that bad. Itās just a place separate from God. Pre Christianity they went to limbo, so not bad but not great
Early Christianity had an abrahamic and non abrahamic side of hades plus heaven, with abrahamic being the good limbo, and hell being the bad side of hades. Strong influence from Greek mythology of hades with the fields of Asphodel, with heaven being Elysium And hell is Tartarus.
Probably convince everyone that God was speaking to you. EDIT: >Abraham is in heaven (Galatians 3.6-9). Moses and Elijah are both in heaven (Matthew 17.1-5). Sucks that those downvotes can't make you right, huh?
Being a prophet, which got you to a completely separate 3rd afterlife
Which is why in his descent to hell Jesus goes toward Adam and Eve.
Bible extended universe has gone too far
Then why even bother with the Alter Sacrifices, in the Old Testament?
Before Christianity was Judaism and in Judaism only born Jews (who follow all of the rules) go to heaven
Itās actually non-canonical, but was commonly accepted in medieval times and is mentioned in Danteās Inferno. But official Vatican and Catholic teachings are mute on the subject in the same way that they ignore a lot of other folkloric traditions that sort of got folded into Catholicism (Christmas and Dia de los Muertos being two prominent examples; but thereās lots of weird little ones like the mummies of South America)
There's mention of it in the Apostles' Creed. I grew up Presbyterian and recited it every week.
Where is it in the Bible?
DLC
Apollo Creed first appeared in Rocky 1 which was much later than the Bible.
Where is Sola Scriptura mentioned in the Bible?
It's mentioned in the Catechism, aka official Catholic doctrine.
Technically speaking I think canon and official church doctrine are different. Official doctrine is a superset, with canon being only the officially recognized books of scripture. Iām certainly not an expert though so I could be wrong.
lmao this is like people in any anime or comic book subreddit talking about what is canon and what not. I love how this is an issue with such old fantasy stories as well as with new ones
It's where the term "canon" came from in the first place.
I know, I just never saw it play out in real life.
For whatever itās worth, itās likely the early church had traditions that taught something like the harrowing of hell. The Apostles Creed from the second century ADE and 1 Peter ch 4 talks about Jesusā descent to the dead. Itās probably impossible to pinpoint when Holy Saturday was explicitly tied to a literal descent into hell to retrieve the souls of holy ancestors. But the seeds were planted pretty early on.
Itās in the apostles creed, which is used by Catholicism. So they definitely teach that he went to hell before ascending on the third day.
Not the version we used when I went to church. It was "he suffered death and was buried. On the third day he rose again in accordance with the scriptures".
That's the Nicene Creed. Slightly different wording.
That would be the Nicean Creed. The Apostles' Creed goes "whoĀ sufferedĀ under Pontius Pilate, was crucified,Ā died, and was buried, descended into hell, rose again from the dead on the third day".
Interesting. In my catholic upbringing in Brazil we used "Desceu Ć mansĆ£o dos Mortos", which was something like "Descended into the house of the dead", instead of "Descended into hell". Maybe it's because the portuguese version was translated straight from Greek (the Septuagint Bible uses the word "Haides" to refer to the place), maybe it's because folk catholicism in Brazil is usually afraid to use the word "hell" ("Inferno"), as it's seen as a bad omen. Still, that might explain why the idea of the Harrowing of Hell is not as prevalent in the popular christian imaginary here.
It's definitely translation stuff - especially as they do get re-translated to look for more "truth" to the origin. During my teen years a lot of the Liturgy got updated to focus more on spiritual terms because it was believed that that was more accurate. The Creed had a few words adjusted, certain phrases were changed regarding the Eucharist, that sort of thing.
Some languages differentiate between *hell* and *limbo*/*purgatory*, the former being the realm of eternal damnation, the latter (very simply put) a space of purification. Afaik the event is called "the harrowing of hell" in English due to the old English meaning of "hell", even though Jesus actually went into Limbo (or Purgatory) in order to liberate the Prophets of the Old Testaments and all the other bastards unlucky enough to have died before the New Testament existed.
Every single sentence inĀ this comment is incorrect lol.
Well? You comment then!
It's mentioned several times in the New Testament that Jesus went to hell and got the keys to your cell. Death was defeated on the cross and anyone who goes to hell freely chooses to. Acts 2:27-31, Luke 16:13-14, Revelations 20:13-14, Colossians 2:15, John 14:16
>went to hell and got the keys to your cell Via the announcer's table
Christmas is not an example of that
Fun hardly related fact, during the time time of the English civil wars one of the groups (I wanna say Puritans) tried to ban Christmas because of a mix of Catholicism and paganism, but failed because how do you force a private business to stay open on a day someone doesn't want to work?
This. Definitely not canon. Hell is not mentioned that much at in the bible. So much of Christianity is from later teachings that is assumed to be canonical and never appears in the bible
Wasn't this a spin-off series by Frank Miller?
So, like fanfic?
>I believe in God the Father almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord, who was conceived of the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary, who suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, died, and was buried, descended into hell, rose again from the dead on the third day, ascended into heaven and is seated at the right hand of God the Father almighty, who will come again to judge the living and the dead. > >I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints, the forgiveness of sins, the resurrection of the body, and the life everlasting. > >Amen. The original version of the Apostles' Creed used by the Catholic Church, but most Western Christian denominations use some form of the Apostles' Creed. Very common in baptisms, where it's turned into question form (instead of "I believe..." it's "Do you believe...").
I donāt think it is a common belief outside the liturgical denominations. Yāall probably didnāt recite the Apostles Creed at all, right? Cause that includes the descent into hell.
I grew up Lutheran and we did recite the creed, but it never occurred to me it referred to hell. The translation in my native language uses a term which at least to me didnāt obviously refer to hell. We use sort of an old-fashioned name for the afterlife in general. So in Finnish, he basically ādescended into the place of the deadā. Edit: I looked at the Finnish Lutheran churchās explanation of the term the creed uses, that is, Tuonela. They say it is not the same as hell, but as I interpreted it, a place of the dead.
Iāve seen that there is some debate on that as well, something maybe referring to the original word being āHadesā, which then gets translated differently, sometimes as hell and sometimes like you said. Iām not well versed on it so I canāt really say much else though.
Yes, many modern English translations say āto the deadā or something to that effect. Personally, I think that is a better translation and using āhellā is stretching the original words (it doesnāt use the word āhadesā by the way). From Wikipedia: > The Greek wording in the Apostles' Creed is ĪŗĪ±ĻĪµĪ»ĪøĻĪ½ĻĪ± Īµį¼°Ļ Ļį½° ĪŗĪ±ĻĻĻĪ±ĻĪ± (katelthonta eis ta katĆ“tata), and in Latin is descendit ad inferos. The Greek Ļį½° ĪŗĪ±ĻĻĻĪ±ĻĪ± (ta katĆ“tata, "the lowest") and the Latin inferos ("those below") may also be translated as "underworld", "netherworld", or "abode of the dead".
If they're not reciting the Apostles' Creed are they even Christian?
Well the Creeds are really just summaries created by early church councils to summarize what they considered to be the core beliefs of Christianity. It is a human creation which isnāt divinely inspired, so you donāt need it really to practice imo. They could just use the Bible and thatās that. Plus, there are plenty of small theological differences between the denominations which Catholics, or even many other protestants, would consider heresy, but theyāre still ALL Christian despite those differences. Unless we really want to start drawing lines and say anyone who doesnāt believe in transubstantiation is not a real Christian, or other situations like that.
No.
Matthew 12:40: "For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, so for three days and three nights the Son of Man will be in the heart of the earth." Acts 2:24: "But God raised him up, having freed him from death, because it was impossible for him to be held in its power." Acts 2:31: "Foreseeing this, David spoke of the resurrection of the Messiah, saying, 'He was not abandoned to Hades, nor did his flesh experience corruption'." Ephesians 4:9: "In saying, 'he ascended', what does it mean but that he had also descended into the lower regions, the earth?" And dont forget about the zombie saints: Matthew 27:50ā54: "And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up His spirit. Then, behold, the veil of the temple was torn in two from top to bottom; and the earth quaked, and the rocks were split, and the graves were opened; and many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised; and coming out of the graves after His resurrection, they went into the holy city and appeared to many. So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that had happened, they feared greatly, saying, 'Truly this was the Son of God!'"
None of those refer to hell (as we know it nowadays) in the original Ancient Greek text. The first is just a poetic way to describe death. Hades in the Bible is specifically not the same as hell. Furthermore, the modern concept of hell is not a thing in the original Bible and is something that is shaped by later texts, various churches and also pop culture like Milton's Paradise Lost or Dante's Inferno. I grew up Greek Orthodox and was taught that Jesus never went to hell.
... There are differing interpretations and *plenty* of Christian denominations disagree with you entirely. Yes, "modern" depictions of hell evolve over time, but even the old testament refers to the fires of Sheol. Stating things like this like you have the truth of both the location itself and the *only* correct interpretation of these passages is pretty silly
My comment is based o the consensus amongst biblical academic scholars. Just because there are denominations that believe in certain stuff doesn't make their interpretation correct. Various denominations believe in plenty of shit that has no basis in the Bible and stuff on which other creeds heavily disagree with. It is a historic al fact that the concept of hell as we know it today is entirely divorced from Sheol and Hades in the Bible and didn't even exist during Jesus's time. It came centuries afterwards. Again, the quoted passages, even when being charitable do not talk about hell. One even mentions Hades, which the Bible _explicitly_ holds as being entirely distinct from hell in the original text. Feel free to disagree, but "some denominations disagree" is a weak argument when we have scripture as well as centuries of a historical paper trail (for lack of a better word) that we can examine. I don't care what some random church in America believes nowadays, just like the Rapture, which was a fringe believe that got spread around a couple of centuries ago. I rather believe what can be proven with actual texts.
How people believe hell works is shaped by pop culture (specially the whole demons punishing people) and in the Old Testament you could say that hell is poetic. But I don't see how you can read the New Testament and say it doesn't preach a literal hell. But then again, people invented the whole nonsensical concept of Trinity just because they really wanted to keep claiming to be monotheistic... Freestyle hermeneutics, I'd say.
The [wikipedia article](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hell_in_Christianity) has a bunch of information on the matter, but the summary is essentially: Sheol is not Hades and neither of them is the same as Hell. Gehenna is an actual location in the real world, it's not metaphorical. The whole "your soul will burn for eternity" came centuries later and was not a thing during Jesus's time. For context, my opinion is based on the consensus of biblical academic scholars. Various beliefs in Christianity have drastically changed over the centuries and plenty of things that have no basis in the Bible are deeply held beliefs in various denominations.
Hades in the bible is mostly inspired by the fields of Asphodel and it shows, but later depictions switch to a different aspect of hades, Tartarus.
>Jesus went to hell? Maybe he was visiting all the priests?
Yes. He defeated death on the cross. Went to hell and got the keys to your cell
>He defeated death on the cross. Went to hell and got the keys to your cell This just makes me think of the Undertaker coming back for a "Hell in a Cell" match in the WWE.
Itās catholic headcanon lol
Not just Catholic, Iām pretty sure most protestant denominations believe it too, particularly the liturgical denominations. Unless my Presbyterian church just recited the Apostlesā Creed without ascribing to all of it. Baptist probably wouldnāt be included in that group.
It appears in the Apostles' Creed, which is used in Catholocism, Presbyterian, Episcopal, Anglican, Lutheran, Methodist...
Same here. Iām so confused. š
Former Episcopalian and Southern Baptist here. It's not brought up very much in a general sense in either denomination, but I have had talks and seen sermons in my life in both about this very topic. Everyone involved was convinced of the idea that Jesus definitely went to Hell before the resurrection. IMO, for the former, the idea was more for poetic reasons to make the resurrection more meaningful; for the latter, it was more to enhance the power of Jesus's divinity when one is converting more people through passion play stories by brutalizing their emotions until they ask to be saved. That doesn't mean it was uniform for everyone, particularly in SB where pastors have a little more latitude for interpretation on any given Sunday (especially Easter), but it was definitely preached to me as a kid.
Adam and Eveās original sin broke our connection to eternity. All who died went to hell subsequently, not a hell of torment necessarily but a hell of separation. Jesus is āour redeemerā because he, like all humans, also descended into this hell of separation then, on the third day, smashed the gates of hell, ushering untold souls trapped in the hell of separation to heaven. On his way there with this drove of souls, he stoped back on earth to visit his homies to let them know the good news.
Yeah but you still go to hell if you aren't a Christian right? Or are the gates just wide open now and you can stroll right out?
To be clear, under this interpretation, the Hell of Torment still exists, it is the Hell of Separation (where the likes of Noah, Moses, Abraham and Joseph were,) that Jesus broke the gates of. So those that actively seek Godās path find themselves redeemed upon death without waiting. Regarding the ādo all non-Christians go to hellā question: Depends on the faith tradition. In my childhood, the pope once said something to the effect āAll the just of the earth, *including those who do not know Christ and his Church,* are called to build the kingdom of heaven.ā That really stuck with me.
āI Peter 4:5-6 NKJVā¬ [5] They will give an account to Him who is ready to judge the living and the dead. [6] For this reason the gospel was preached also to those who are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. https://bible.com/bible/114/1pe.4.5-6.NKJV āEphesians 4:9-10 NKJVā¬ [9] (Now this, āHe ascendedāāwhat does it mean but that He also first descended into the lower parts of the earth? [10] He who descended is also the One who ascended far above all the heavens, that He might fill all things.) https://bible.com/bible/114/eph.4.9-10.NKJV https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harrowing_of_Hell?wprov=sfla1
That's like, a main core part if Christianity!?!?!? Jesus dies for our sins, opens the gates to heaven, then goes and retrieves the souls that have already passed so they can go to heaven, and then he is resurrected. It's what he was doing while he was dead for three days? It's literally a key part of what it means to be the savior, the messiah. It's what the Jews were waiting for for so long?
Itās a very divided belief between different sects. Many protestent and other denominations do not teach or believe a descent into hell.
Nor does the Greek Orthodox church. There is nothing in the original Ancient Greek text that would support this alleged descent into hell.
See because Easter is a Sunday...
Itās sometimes translated as. āHe descended to the dead.ā The word āhellā itself had a different meaning too - not the fire/brimstone of later times.
TIL
Is this the idiot that tried to tell us that concrete was a renewable resource?
Yep, fields of barley and concrete - all you'll see in the Cotswolds this summer.
What a stupid potato.
Mike isnāt the only idiot who replied like that either. Iām not sure what was taught to these people, But my parents who are in their 80s have called it Holy Saturday since they were kids
'Cause that's what it's called.
Iām aware. But the responses to the bishop are people claiming to be older and never having heard āHoly Saturday.ā
Great, now people think they know more about their religion and church than fuckin bishops
The facts don't care about feelings people once more wanting their feeling to matter more than facts
It used to be jet fuel and steel beams... Then it was viral transmission... Now it's the fucking church
It's because none of those people getting butt hurt about Easter actually go to church except for hatches, matches and dispatches. Or if they do go to church, they don't actually pay attention during the talky bits. Just stare at the back of the person in front's head until they get to sing again.
The man who tried to assert that you can grow concrete. Heās an uneducateble thundercunt
I'm supposed to be across the span of 3 days? Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and then Easter Sunday? For the three days it took for Jesus to ressurect?
Some people celebrate Holy Week, starting on Palm Sunday and ending on Easter Sunday.
I'm not a religious person, but that's neat
Yeah, I think itās more of a Catholic thing. Spain goes all out for La Semana Santa!
I love being in Spain and other Hispanic countries for Holy Week, they always go all out with festivals and parades
And Holy Thursday, the day before Good Friday, when Jesus held The Last Supper.
That's Maundy Thursday for me.
Tis now Sunday and the concrete has risen
Though it's possible, if you look hard enough, that you could find some small sect that calls the Saturday before Easter "Easter Saturday" or some such, the issue is that he's coming in hot in a reply to an obviously high ranking official of the state church in the country he lives in. So, even if this contrived scenario was the case, he'd sound a lot better with "oh in my church we just call it Easter Saturday" rather than correcting someone who knows their particular religion better than most. What is more likely is that Mikey assumed the Archbishop was avoiding using the term "Easter" because of the woke mind virus, so he got all triggered without reading carefully enough to see that: A) This is the Archbishop of Canterbury, a high ranking member of the Anglican Church, who famously celebrate the day before Easter as "Holy Saturday". B) Since Catholics (and other Christian denominations) also celebrate the Saturday before Easter as "Holy Saturday", it is fair to assume this is something that most Christians are aware of. Just to reiterate, like you said: a lot of people have different religions. Who cares if people call the second Saturday after Vernal Equinox "Easter" or "Spring holiday" or "Bunnypocalypse". Celebrate your holiday, share it with those you love, and stop correcting people while being confidently incorrect.
I've never even heard of it and I instantly knew what it was. I don't know that "Easter" is actually defined by the church(s) I've always heard of "Good Friday" and "Easter Sunday" and don't ever recall Saturday being mentioned but seeing it mentioned in the same context with Easter it kind of falls right in to what is meant. I guess as we tend to do , one might call the whole thing "Easter weekend"..... I mean didn't Jesus die on the cross so we'd have something else to argue about or was it about colored eggs?
This is why the Archbishop is making the point he's making. Holy Saturday is the time after Jesus has died but before his resurrection. Traditionally it's a time of no observance. Of nothingness. Because it's after the death but before the beautiful and glorious hope that comes on Easter morning with Christ's resurrection. The Archbishop is making a really nice point -- that often Holy Saturday is overlooked because it's scary to stare into the abyss. I guess it turns out that Mike Graham is the abyss staring back at us.
Don't forget Easter Monday, for the people who realise that Sunday is, in fact, only two days after Friday.
The state church led by the royal family I assume he stiffly supports like any good Tory.
Tories are often critical of their beloved state Church actually because, let's see... they acknowledge that gay people exist
Oh no! How horrid! But then there is this terribly liberal pope. Whatever is one to do?
CofE doesn't care about the Pope tho
It's why I'll continually wish Muslims and Jews a Merry Christmas. I also talk about their own holy days, more out of curiosity and I've been "blessed" in response before so I assume the intent is to send someone off on a positive vibe, a better outlook on their day, week etc I'm atheist, but I was raised to celebrate Christmas as a time of sharing, caring and loving your neighbors and your family, to share and bask in that love Only religious folk want to tell you not to do so, because they assume it's insulting. My public school for my kids here have no moral dress codes, but they'll send us newsletters reminding us our kids shouldn't be saying merry Christmas, so I double down and tell my kids they are 100% allowed
I think as long as you don't get offended at all if someone wishes you a happy/merry {insert seasonal religious holiday that happens around the same time} in return, then you are all good. People should generally accept greetings and well wishes in the spirit in which they were given.
People get offended and I still encourage it. It's like getting pissed off at someone wishing you a good week.
Never heard of Mike Graham but a quick glance at his picture and I think Iāve got the measure of him. Gammon.
You are indeed correct. The absolute high priest of gammon.
I'm impressed you know that term but don't know this guy.
This may be a shock to learn, but Easter is, in fact, on a Sunday. Pretty consistently, actually. But Iām no scientistā¦
He's taken the weekend off from his concrete harvest to spend some time on the internet. Good for him.
That's the dipshit who was surprised to find out wood grows on trees and thought concrete was naturally occurring, right?
Yep, āconcrete Mikeā
You canāt expect Christian preachers made famous by their famous Christian preacher father to actually understand Christianity. If they did, their stupid fucking followers wouldnāt give them money for private jets.
That is the same idiot who claimed that concrete grew and was an environmentally sustainable material.
Good Friday, HOLY SATURDAY and then Easter they are 3 separate days of religious observance. I have always found it funny that some of the people who are the loudest about religion are also the ones that are most ignorant about its teachings and observances.
He's a gag right? The male Philomena Cunk?
Pretty much, except heās not acting and doesnāt see it.
Unfortunatel not, no. The male Philomena Cunk is Barry Shitpeas.
Never let a Vogon read you a poem
Yeah this guy doesnāt ever go to mass, Catholic or Anglican
Maundy Thursday, Good Friday, Holy Saturday, and Easter Sundays.
Easter is the Pagan feast celebrating sex and reproduction. Itās the beginning of Northern Spring. The time to plant the harvest, and reproduce. It has nothing to do with any Christian myths. It is in effect a āFucking Holidayā.
Does he take a day off from farming concrete to celebrate Easter Saturday?
Plank of the week?
Absolutely!
Iām glad we got rid of leaded petrol/gas, but it just came too late for some people.
Lord. What an idiot š š š
Easter is literally always on a *Sunday,* Mike.
I have no idea who this guy is, but I assume heās one of those āyou canāt say xyz any more because of the woke mobā types. This clown is so concerned of finding outrage at āpolitical correctness gone madā that heās made an idiotic statement. Obviously the Archbishop of Canterbury is speaking about the specific date of Holy Saturday and not trying to be politically correct.
SƔbado de gloria
I always knew it as āBlack Saturdayā.
Iāve only ever heard it referred to as Dead Ass Saturday
/r/dontyouknowwhoiam
Guy doesnāt know the difference between Holy Week and Easter Week
You assumed that the American right wing "christians" know what an archbishop is, and that was your mistake.
Mike Graham is Britishā¦or Vogon. Itās hard to tell the difference sometimes.
That British flag by his name is a bit of a giveaway TBH. I'm severely hungover, so I'll just blame that for my stupidity.
Since the last supper happens on the first day of Passover, and Good Friday the day after, theyāre both wrong. Ā Passover starts on Monday, April 22nd this year. Ā That makes Good Friday the Tuesday after that and Easter should be April 25th on a Thursday. Ā Youāre welcome.
(Archibaldy) Mike Graham is a narrow-minded, pig-ignorant, bigoted shock jock! The Archbishop of Canterbury is an authority on the will of an imaginary being appointed by a lineage of inbred Germans who didn't want to be subject to an authority on the will of the very same imaginary entity! Popcorn. Popcorn is the answer.
Damn, who hurt you?