I would say that Jesus' human soul descended into hades (not Gehenna) yet He, in Deity, was in paradise. Compare this with when he stated 'the Son of man which is in heaven' when he stood on earth, bodily. But many will have other opinions so you need to scope this question towards a particular viewpoint. Up-voted +1.

related: christianity.stackexchange.com/q/26238/22319

The translation is not correct. The accurate words uttered by Jesus on that day are I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise

@SoFewAgainstSoMany. What is your source?. I reviewed all translations available at biblehub.com/luke/23-43.htm, and all says "today you will be with me in paradise". The same in my spanish copy of "Biblia de Jerusalem". I bet you are using the Jehova Witness translation.

@SoFewAgainstSoMany What on earth would those words mean ? Ask me tomorrow, and I'll tell you something different ? ? ?

@NigelJ And both will be dead by the end of the day. There is no "tomorrow" for them.

@NigelJ, because Jesus did not go to heaven that day, he descended into the heart of the earth.

@CandidMoe, because Jesus did not go to heaven that day, he descended into the heart of the earth.

@NigelJ asks "What on earth would those words mean ? Ask me tomorrow, and I'll tell you something different ? ? ?" — The response is anti-parallel to the structure of the thief's request. "remember me — when thou comest into thy kingdom" ⇒ "I can tell you now — and I don't need to remember, I can assure you that you will see me there".

@RayButterworth I don't think this question should be closed as duplicate because the 3 suggested questions do not specifically ask how to reconcile the line in the Apostle's Creed and Luke 23:43. I have edited the question to highlight this aspect. Please consider reopening.

@SoFewAgainstSoMany. I'm still waiting for the sources of your quotation.

@GratefulDisciple asks "If Jesus descended into hell until his resurrection, he could not have gone to Paradise on the same day. Is the Apostles' Creed wrong?" — No, it's not wrong. The Creed says "he descended into hell", which does not conflict with "Truly, I tell you today, you will be with me in paradise". If the Creed is correct there must be an explanation for the apparent conflict. As answered in the older question, the placement of the comma was the arbitrary decision of the translators, not of the original text, so it is that decision that was wrong, not the scripture or the Creed.

@RayButterworth Yes, but there is another explanation that doesn't have to rely on comma placement, so this question allows other answers that doesn't depend on comma placement, which IMO is a rather insecure basis. That's why I think the question should be reopened. I wonder whether the church fathers have answered it based on comma placement (maybe worth another question).

@CandidMoe, my source is simple logic. Jesus went into the heart of the earth and remained there for three days, on the last day is when he rose from the dead and went to the Father because he told that woman not to touch him for he had not yet ascended to the Father, use logic and you will have your answer.

@SoFewAgainstSoMany You said the correct translation is "I tell you today," which is not found in any translation accepted by christians. So, from where did you take it?

@CandidMoe, I did a personal investigation of the context. If Jesus told Mary not to touch him because he had not yet ascended then how was it possible for him to have been with that thief in paraduise on that day?

@RayButterworth OK, OK. I'm going to excuse myself and let CandidMoe himself fight for reopening (if he wants to) by rephrasing it if his intention is not resolved by the 3 suggested duplicates.

The problem with this question is that it is a double-barreled question: 1) Is there biblical support for the Creed's statement that Jesus "descended into hell" after his crucifixion? and 2) How can that be reconciled with Luke 23:43?. ¶The first question is trivial to answer, so all it does is make the second question seem a lot more complicated than it really is. A better wording would have been something like "Given Acts 2:31, and its confirmation by the Apostles' Creed, how can Luke 23:43 be reconciled with it?". ¶And there are already answers to that question elsewhere.

@RayButterworth My question is tagged "catholicism", which accept the Apostle's Creed and doesn't question it. Your "rewording" looks like evading the question.

@CandidMoe says "Your "rewording" looks like evading the question." — You asked two questions, which isn't allowed. As for the Creed question itself, as I already said, it is trivial to answer. No one disagrees with it. I'm not evading it; I'm discarding it as irrelevant to the real question.

@CandidMoe He had not yet ascended to the Father in humanity. He is always in the bosom of the Father as Son.