Where did Christ go?

[marco]

In Acts 1 we have:

And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold two men stood by them in white apparel.

Which also said: Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.


The above raises a few questions.

Does the location of heaven in the sky suggest the story is mere fabrication?
In what possible way could Jesus physically vanish above the clouds?
Is the appearance of "two men" in white simply a "deus ex machina" device to explain what happened - at least partially?
Would listeners reasonably suppose that the return of Jesus is more than 2000 years away?
A reasonable person would dismiss all this as nonsense. But why, then, has it been accepted for centuries?

[Talishi]

I suppose that one could say that Augustine means the creation of all things when he means the creation of man, but that would run counter to the same author who also said that the angels were created with the creation of material things and that they have existed from the ages.

If one reads Genesis 2, one gets the distinct impression that the creation of man preceded the creation of all other living things, at least on Earth. There is a timeline that has Satan in rebellion and cast down to Earth before the creation of Adam, but then we read in the Book of Job that Satan can freely come and go in heaven after the creation of Adam.

[Talishi]

The kingdom of heaven is not a place or dimension to be discovered and analyzed, but a reality to be experienced.

Alas, for me and my ilk experiencing reality consists precisely of discovering and analyzing it.

[JLB32168]

If one reads Genesis 2, one gets the distinct impression that the creation of man preceded the creation of all other living things, at least on Earth.

Yes, but nothing youve said contradicts what I have, namely, that a 1)metaphorical interpretation of the Creation account isnt a modern example of backpedaling to make Christianity comport w/science, and 2)the existence of the vastness of space and Christ ascension into the heavens are perfectly compatible with one another.

There is a timeline that has Satan in rebellion and cast down to Earth before the creation of Adam, but then we read in the Book of Job that Satan can freely come and go in heaven after the creation of Adam.

So the writer of Job was oblivious to Genesis? Is there no other interpretation that allows the logical " that the writer of Job knew full well Satan was cast out of heaven since he cannot have been ignorant of earlier Hebrew works that described just that?

[Talishi]

If one reads Genesis 2, one gets the distinct impression that the creation of man preceded the creation of all other living things, at least on Earth.

Yes, but nothing youve said contradicts what I have, namely, that a 1)metaphorical interpretation of the Creation account isnt a modern example of backpedaling to make Christianity comport w/science...

I have shown that Augustine insisted on a 6,000 year timeline for the creation of man, and that the creation of man preceded the creation of all other living things. If he allows for a deeper time, it must have been a barren earth for the majority of that time.

Notwithstanding, the position of the Western Church was for a more literal interpretation of the Bible, as seen in the house arrest of Galileo for teaching that the Earth revolved around the Sun. As late as the early 20th Century the Church resisted "modernism". The Scopes trial seems to have been the straw that broke the camel's back.

Since that time, theists (not only Christians) have taken up a new hobby, which is to wait for science to announce such things as evidence of gravitational waves, or the release of light at the horizon of last scattering, then scour scripture to boast it was in there first.

[marco]

Assuming the supernatural exists, why does this present a problem? If one doesnt believe it exists then clearly this did not happen.

Not the point being made, JLB. The discussion was about the portrayal of heaven as accessible through the clouds. Since common belief at the time placed heaven in the sky, it would seem that the writers were without their Spiritual Guide.

Im not sure theres much else to be debated since the rest of these questions are easy if the supernatural exists, but false if it doesnt and the existence of supernatural cannot be proved.

The discussion isn't about the existence of the supernatural. If you are saying that we can take the supernatural as axiomatic and conclude ANYTHING can happen as a result, there's no point in any biblical discussion. Of course you may believe this is so.

The upward journey of Christ and the casual appearance of two aliens, with explanations, would be regarded as artificial in a play. Even if we accept most of Christ's adventures, it is possible to draw the line at some that are too far-fetched and seem to rely on inventive superstition. My contention is the Ascension is one such.

As for the promise of Christ re-appearing from the clouds, there is a certain inane pointlessness in it all. He rises without explanation and his exit is voiced-over by two supernatural beings. Does credulity EVER say 'enough!' ?

[marco]

After all if humans can create objects that can lift of the ground, presuming God exists (which I suppose we are for the sake of argument) then it is reasonable and logical that God can at least do the same.

Logic,

It is ironic that you place the word "logic" at the end of your statements. When witnesses see Jesus ascending through the air to heaven it is logical to assume they THINK heaven is up in the sky. That was an understandable belief THEN; it is now seen to be false. Your explanation involves special pleading.

Why would God assist humans in their misconception? The descent of God on mountains is a further indication that the writers thought heaven was in the upper air. Surely, in the interests of truth, this misconception should have been rectified by whatever spiritual inspiring force is involved.

[marco]

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a rainbow, that appears solid form a distance, but disappears into water vapor as one attempts to approach it. The kingdom of heaven is not a place or dimension to be discovered and analyzed, but a reality to be experienced.

A good comparison, though it leans more to the side of the non-theist. A rainbow, like heaven, has all the appearance of being something real but on examination is imaginary, its beauty totally dependent on human viewpoint.

I believe that the purpose of the ascension was not to affirm a view that heaven is in the sky, but to impress upon the viewers the concept of coming and going.

This too is a nice philosophical way of seeing it. The simple men seeing Christ rising would not be instructed in comings and goings but would come away with the conviction that Jesus rose to a physical heaven. What else were they to think?

The declaration that he'd be back would surely suggest a short time period and since they were burdened with this info, they would take it that they had to wait around for Christ's return. Consequently there would be an expectation of a second coming, if not in the next few days, most certainly in their lifetime. It would be absurd for the communication to mean - after thousands of years have passed. What use is that to man or beast? And if that's all these divine messengers thought fit to mention, why did they bother appearing?

[Talishi]

Assuming the supernatural exists, why does this present a problem? If one doesnt believe it exists then clearly this did not happen.

Not the point being made, JLB. The discussion was about the portrayal of heaven as accessible through the clouds.

The bible says rain came when "the windows of heaven were opened". Not just in Noah's day, but in the future:

Revelation 11:6 These have power to shut heaven, that it rain not in the days of their prophecy...

[bluethread]

Again, the kingdom of heaven is like a rainbow, that appears solid form a distance, but disappears into water vapor as one attempts to approach it. The kingdom of heaven is not a place or dimension to be discovered and analyzed, but a reality to be experienced.

A good comparison, though it leans more to the side of the non-theist. A rainbow, like heaven, has all the appearance of being something real but on examination is imaginary, its beauty totally dependent on human viewpoint.

Hence the parable; "a succinct, didactic story, in prose or verse, which illustrates one or more instructive lessons or principles." The requirement that it apply beyond the point being made is a common error of the scientific humanist.

I believe that the purpose of the ascension was not to affirm a view that heaven is in the sky, but to impress upon the viewers the concept of coming and going.

This too is a nice philosophical way of seeing it. The simple men seeing Christ rising would not be instructed in comings and goings but would come away with the conviction that Jesus rose to a physical heaven. What else were they to think?

The declaration that he'd be back would surely suggest a short time period and since they were burdened with this info, they would take it that they had to wait around for Christ's return. Consequently there would be an expectation of a second coming, if not in the next few days, most certainly in their lifetime. It would be absurd for the communication to mean - after thousands of years have passed. What use is that to man or beast? And if that's all these divine messengers thought fit to mention, why did they bother appearing?

Hence the instruction, (W)hy do you stand here looking into the sky? This same Jesus, who has been taken from you into heaven, will come back in the same way you have seen him go into heaven. They were telling them to get back to work. If the boss leaves and says he will be coming back, he is not necessarily going to say when, because he wants you to get to work, not stand around until just before he comes back, note the parables of the bridesmaids, the landlord, etc.

[bluethread]

The kingdom of heaven is not a place or dimension to be discovered and analyzed, but a reality to be experienced.

Alas, for me and my ilk experiencing reality consists precisely of discovering and analyzing it.

Fine, but don't forget to experience it, even those parts that you have not yet fully discovered or analyzed.