X. What is said of “the sepulcher” and “death” (Gen. 37:35; 42:38)—that Jacob was about to go down with sadness (lsh’vl) (“into the grave”) is falsely drawn to limbo. Sh’vl or hadēs is the grave into which men descend after death.
XI. “The pit wherein is no water,” from which the ancients were to be sent forth by the blood of the covenant (Zech. 9:11), ought not to be drawn to limbo since this may be said partly literally concerning deliverance from the Babylonian captivity and the miseries accompanying it (from which the Jews were not yet entirely freed); partly mystically, concerning the spiritual captivity under sin from which Christ frees us by the efficacy of his blood, by which the covenant of grace is ratified (as it was the foundation of all deliverances even temporal).
XII. It was not the real Samuel who was seen by the woman (1 S. 28:12), but only his apparition (spectrum) (to wit, a demon personating the prophet), who came out of the earth to terrify Saul, as Satan himself often transfigures himself into an angel of light. For no right or dominion belongs to demons over the souls of the pious whom God has received into the eternal tabernacle that they may rest from their labors (otherwise their condition after death would be worse than in life, in which, armed with faith, they are safe from all the assaults of Satan). Besides, if it was Samuel himself, he would not have suffered Saul to worship him; nor could it be said that God had not answered Saul consulting him—neither by priests nor by prophets, because he had answered then by the prophets. Nor is there anything important as to the mistake in the name of Samuel given to that apparition; it could be so called on account of similitude, as images are usually called by the names of the things themselves of which they are images (as Augustine fully proves ad Simplicianum). Nor is there any importance in this that it predicted future things because this could be done by divine revelation for the punishment of men (as the same Augustine and after him Lyranus observe; cf. De diversis questionibus ad Simplicianum [PL 40:101–48]).
XIII. It is said that no one ascended into heaven before the Son of man descended from heaven (Jn. 3:13), not as to local ascension to the beatific vision because Enoch and Elijah had already been translated even bodily, but as to a mystical ascension (i.e., a knowledge of heavenly things to be made manifest to men). As “to ascend into heaven” (Rom. 10:6) is to know divine mysteries (cf. Prov. 30:4). In this sense, it is said that no one has ever seen God, but the Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, he has revealed him to us (Jn. 1:18); and “neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal him” (Mt. 11:27).
XIV. “The way into the holiest of all” is said not to have been manifested before the ascension of Christ (Heb. 9:8); not that it was entirely concealed, but (1) that it was not so clearly made known. Therefore the fathers went into heaven through Christ (in whom they believed) because he is the way of entrance into heaven, but who was not yet clearly known because he had not yet come. (2) Again, it was not known to any of the Gentiles, as in the New Testament. (3) It was not as yet manifested by the actual ransom (lytrō) of Christ (which had not yet been paid), but only as to efficacy of merit. (4) Time is not compared with time here, but rather the Mosaic sacrifices with the sacrifice of Christ, to intimate that they could not open heaven to us, which was granted to the blood of Christ alone. (5) If Christ is said to have been the first who entered into heaven, this is to be understood not as to time, but as to causality because the entrance of Christ was the true cause of the fathers’ no less than of our entrance into heaven.
XV. The “prison” (phylakē) mentioned in 1 Pet. 3:19 (“by which [Spirit] also Christ went and preached unto the spirits in prison” [tois en phylakē]) cannot mean the limbo of the fathers. He speaks of those which “sometime were disobedient” (apeithēsasi pote), while Christ by his prophetic Spirit through Noah preached repentance to them. Rather it denotes the infernal prison (as in Rev. 20:7) in which (in the time of Peter) they were held shut up on account of their resistance to the preaching of Christ by Noah (to wit, to those who are in prison now [tois en phylakē ousi], not who were formerly there).
XVI. Although it can be said that the ancients received some increase of knowledge and consolation after the exhibition of Christ in the flesh and his ascension unto heaven (as is said of the angels, Eph. 3:10), it does not follow that they had been altogether excluded from heaven and from beholding the face of God; but only that their beatitude was not yet fully consummated. To this some refer the words of the apostle: “God having provided some better things for us, that they without us should not be made perfect” (Heb. 11:40). And to this Calvin seems to have had respect by the mirror or act of watching in which he says the fathers were said from a desire of Christ not to exclude them from the fruition of beatitude and the vision of God, but to mark the desire and earnest expectation (apokaradokian) of the advent of Christ, to which also the angels are said to have looked (1 Pet. 1:12) (Epistle of Paul … to the Hebrews and the First and Second Epistles of St. Peter [trans. W. B. Johnston, 1963], p. 293 on 1 Pet. 3:19).
XVII. The promise sometimes denotes the first advent of Christ in the flesh promised in the Old Testament; sometimes the second in glory promised in the New. The ancients died without “receiving the promise” (Heb. 11:39)—namely, concerning the former advent of Christ, which was reserved for us without them. But believers still wait for the promise (epangelian)—namely, to be brought in the latter advent of the Lord (Heb. 10:36, 37)—which they also themselves are about to receive; but not without us for what we now expect will be common to us with them. Thus God has set before us “something better” (kreitton ti) with regard to the former advent, in which we alone rejoice.
Francis Turretin, Institutes of Elenctic Theology, 12.4.10–17, ed. James T. Dennison Jr., trans. George Musgrave Giger, vol. 2 (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 1992–97), 260–61.
Turretin Contra The Limbus Patrum
RESOURCES
- Subscribe To The Heidelblog!
- Download the HeidelApp on Apple App Store or Google Play
- Browse the Heidelshop!
- The Heidelblog Resource Page
- Heidelmedia Resources
- The Ecumenical Creeds
- The Reformed Confessions
- The Heidelberg Catechism
- The Heidelberg Catechism: A Historical, Theological, & Pastoral Commentary (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2025)
- Recovering the Reformed Confession (Phillipsburg: P&R Publishing, 2008)
- Why I Am A Christian
- What Must A Christian Believe?
- Heidelblog Contributors
- Support Heidelmedia: use the donate button or send a check to
Heidelberg Reformation Association
1637 E. Valley Parkway #391
Escondido CA 92027
USA
The HRA is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization
Heidelblog
The Heidelblog has been in publication since 2007. It is devoted to recovering the Reformed confession and to helping others discover Reformed theology, piety, and practice.
More by Heidelblog ›