9 When he had said this, as they were watching, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight.(Acts 1:9, NRSVUE)
From becoming a Christian to Bible College, then Seminary, and pastoring for 15 years, the only way I thought Acts 1:9 could be interpreted was by believing Jesus literally floated up to heaven. It wasn't until I studied the topic outside the Evangelical tribe and looked to modern scholarship that I learned you don't have to understand this verse literally. At first read, that last sentence may feel like a shot to the system, I know.
What's even more interesting is that not only is there an alternative to taking Jesus's ascension literally, but there's only one place in the entire New Testament where it could be taken literally—Acts 1:9. The reason this is the only place in the New Testament where Jesus's ascension can and has been taken literally is that Luke is the only gospel author to make Jesus's resurrection and ascension two separate events.
Stop for a second and consider that. Of the four gospels in the Christian Bible Matthew, Mark, and John all describe and view Jesus's resurrection and ascension as a single event. This is especially important because understanding both acts as a single event naturally lends itself to being understood in non-literal terms. Whereas with Luke, by separating the acts into two events it lends itself to be understood literally.
The question that naturally comes to mind is why? Well, it's because a natural follow-up question to hearing the resurrection and ascension are two separate acts is, "What was Jesus doing in between the two events?" Church history has answered the question by sharing that Jesus was literally on the earth revealing himself in physical form to prove he literally resurrected before literally ascending to heaven.
The church calendar reinforces the literalness of the resurrection, especially in liturgical traditions (I'm currently part of an Episcopal tradition, which is highly liturgical). Much like Luke, the church breaks down Easter, Ascension, and Pentecost into three different occasions within the liturgical calendar. There are two problems with church history's promotion of a literal resurrection and its celebration as separate events in the liturgical calendar.
Two Problems with The Church Promoting a Literal Ascension Narrative.
The first problem is fairly straightforward. As mentioned above, only one of the four gospel authors, Luke, explains the resurrection and ascension as two separate events. Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong expresses the irony of the church promoting this narrative when he says:
"These two events have been so deeply burned into the consciousness of Christians through the celebration of the liturgical year that we find it difficult to imagine that they hang by the thread of only one Gospel." (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p. 180)
In seminary (I went to arguably one of the most fundamentalist seminaries in America), I was taught that it's good hermeneutics to look at a text and evaluate it with every other text on the same topic to best understand what the "plain meaning of the passage is." Here's the thing: using the method taught to me by my Evangelical/Fundamentalist seminary, three gospels teach a non-literal resurrection/ascension as a single act. Based on good hermeneutics the non-literal single event makes it clear Luke's narrative must have something more to it than an initial literal understanding lends itself to.
This brings us to the second issue: modern biblical scholarship has effectively demonstrated that Luke does not take Jesus's ascension literally, nor was it his intent for others who read his work to do so. Let me explain.
What Happens If We Take Jesus's Ascension and Modern Physiology Literally
Luke did not understand the vastness of space. In the first century, the common understanding of the cosmos was that there was a canopy of water hovering above the earth. Stars were believed to be holes in the said canopy, explaining where the rain came from. It was also believed that these sky holes were how God (or the gods) kept an eye on humanity from heaven.
Now, one of the biggest lessons I've learned from C.S. Lewis (another great Episcopalian) is to regularly guard myself from what he calls 'chronological snobbery.' According to Lewis, this term describes, "
“the uncritical acceptance of the intellectual climate of our own age and the assumption that whatever has gone out of date is on that count discredited." (C.S. Lewis Institute, accessed April 22, 2024)
I share this concept to make the point I do not simply believe because Luke doesn't understand cosmology like we do, which automatically makes us right or 'better' in some way. Not at all; I'm simply pointing out the limitation of the time and how facts we assume today would be completely foreign to someone in the first century.
Bishop John Shelby Spong again explains the reality of Jesus's ascension if we apply modern-day physiology. So, let's take a literal ascension and apply it to a literal understanding of physiology. Here's Bishop Spong explaining the result:
"If Jesus ascended physically into the sky, and if he rose as rapidly as the speed of light (186,000 miles per second), he would not yet have reached the edges of our own galaxy. There are more stars in our single galaxy than there are human beings who have ever lived on the face of this earth in all of its history." (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p. 31)
Luke's Use of the Story of Elijah and Elisha as an archetype of Jesus
Luke did not intend for his ascension narrative to be taken literally because modern scholarship says so. Rather, looking at the context of all four gospels we can see Luke employing a similar tactic that his gospel author contemporaries also leveraged.
Throughout Matthew, John, and Luke, the author intentionally contrasts Jesus against a significant Jewish figure. The gospel authors do this purposely to connect Jesus to his distinctly Jewish roots while also showing Jesus as the new and better version of each figure.
Matthew presents Jesus as a new Moses, John presents Jesus as the embodiment of Lady Wisdom, and Luke presents Jesus as a new Elijah. In 2 Kings 2 we see Elijah and Elisha preparing for Elijah's departure. Let's take a look at a few key texts from 2 Kings 2.
2 Now when the Lord was about to take Elijah up to heaven by a whirlwind, Elijah and Elisha were on their way from Gilgal. 2 Elijah said to Elisha, “Stay here, for the Lord has sent me as far as Bethel.” But Elisha said, “As the Lord lives and as you yourself live, I will not leave you.” So they went down to Bethel. (2 Kings 2:1-2, NRSVUE)
9 When they had crossed, Elijah said to Elisha, “Tell me what I may do for you before I am taken from you.” Elisha said, “Please let me inherit a double share of your spirit.” 10 He responded, “You have asked a hard thing, yet if you see me as I am being taken from you, it will be granted you; if not, it will not.” 11 As they continued walking and talking, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them, and Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into heaven. 12 Elisha kept watching and crying out, “Father, father! The chariots of Israel and its horsemen!” But when he could no longer see him, he grasped his own clothes and tore them in two pieces. (2 Kings 2:9-12, NRSVUE)
15 When the company of prophets who were at Jericho saw him at a distance, they declared, “The spirit of Elijah rests on Elisha.” They came to meet him and bowed to the ground before him. (2 Kings 2:15, NRSVUE)
Based on the texts here is a summary of what took place:
- Elijah is preparing to ascend to heaven by a whirlwind. He promises Elisha, his only disciple, that he will not leave him.
- Elijah asks Elisha what he could give him as a final request. Elisha asks for a double portion of Elijah's spirit.
- Because it was a difficult request, Elijah told Elisha that if he saw Elijah's departure, he would receive a double portion of his spirit.
- When Elisha sees Elijah taken up, he receives a double portion of Elijah's spirit, and the sons of the prophets acknowledge this passing of the mantle by bowing to Elisha.
What Luke Was Actually Communicating About Jesus's Ascension
Having reviewed the story of Elijah and Elisha, we can now see what Luke is doing in patterning Jesus's narrative. To show Jesus as the new and better Elijah Jesus is shown in Acts 1 as the heir of this Jewish prophetic tradition. Here are ways that Luke paints his image of Jesus after Elijah:
- Like Elijah, Jesus walks toward his final earthly destination at Jerusalem and then Calvary.
- Like Elijah, Jesus was accompanied by his disciples.
- Where Elijah's disciples stayed staunchly faithful to the end, Jesus's disciples abandoned him.
- Where Elijah's disciples stayed staunchly faithful to the end, Jesus's disciples abandoned him.
- Like Elijah, Jesus was taken up to heaven.
- Where Elijah needed a fiery chariot and horses, Jesus ascended to heaven on his own.
- Where Elijah needed a fiery chariot and horses, Jesus ascended to heaven on his own.
- Where Elisha received a double portion of Elijah's spirit, Jesus's disciples received the infinite power of God.
- Where Elijah's spirit was received by a single disciple, Jesus's spirit was poured on every disciple present.
- Where Elijah's spirit was received by a single disciple, Jesus's spirit was poured on every disciple present.
- Where Elijah's fire was a consuming fire, Jesus's fire did not destroy. Rather, it purified, cleansed, and bound human beings together.
Some may contend that Jesus's ascension can be both literal and a metaphor for how he is the new and better Elijah. For those who hold this view, I understand the logic. It's a kind of 'best of both worlds,' however, I don't believe this is a matter of both/and.
Once again, Bishop John Shelby Spong explains:
"Even Luke knew he was writing in a symbolic way. He was, in fact, retelling the story of Elijah as the vehicle through which to lead his gentile audience to see a Jewish Jesus who had become the universal Christ." (Rescuing the Bible from Fundamentalism, p. 181)
I don't believe this text lends itself to a both/and interpretation because I don't believe Luke would want the readers of Luke/Acts to get caught up in the literalness of Jesus's ascension and miss the bigger point. The point Luke is making in Jesus's ascension is that for those who have received the Spirit of Christ, the human and divine have touched. As a result, the depth and beauty of humanity can at last be seen and experienced. Pentecost confirms the primary evidence of someone who has received the Spirit of Christ is not whether they believe Jesus literally ascended. The mark is a barrier-free life where inclusive communities are built, and people are known, respected, dignified, and loved regardless of their race, nationality, economic status, or gender.
8 And how is it that we hear, each of us, in our own native language? 9 Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and residents of Mesopotamia, Judea and Cappadocia, Pontus and Asia, 10 Phrygia and Pamphylia, Egypt and the parts of Libya belonging to Cyrene, and visitors from Rome, both Jews and proselytes, 11 Cretans and Arabs—in our own languages we hear them speaking about God’s deeds of power.” 12 All were amazed and perplexed, saying to one another, “What does this mean?” (Acts 2:8-12)
This means that the full portion of the Spirit of Christ has been poured out on all who follow Jesus's path.
_______________________
Thanks for stopping by and reading this article! If my work has served you or you want to contribute to creating authentic faith connections, consider becoming an Authentic Faith Advocate.
Thanks for stopping by and reading this article! If my work has served you or you want to contribute to creating authentic faith connections, consider becoming an Authentic Faith Advocate.