To where did Jesus ascend?

[marco]

We have in Luke 24:51:
"While He was blessing them, He parted from them and was carried up into heaven."


We now know that heaven is not in the area of the clouds. Of course in the time of Christ it was believed that the home of God was in the sky: heaven and sky are often the same.

Does this account show that there was fabrication, based on false beliefs?

If Jesus knew heaven wasn't in the sky, why would he employ deception, rising to nowhere?


Or is the account - as usual - figurative. Jesus was raised to eminence, but not literally.

[marco]

… People believe or imagine angels, Jesus etc. This would make God, Jesus, angels products of human imagination. ….

Sorry, I don’t believe human imagination could produce the idea of Bible God. I don’t think people are good enough for doing that.

There's no need to apologise. When one explores the complexities man has uncovered in science and the beautiful creations he has made in art and literature, it is not just "possible" man created the biblical God, but absolutely certain. Man has made beings more glorious, more moral, kinder, lovelier, happier....even more brutal that Yahweh.


Yahweh is restricted by his time, a writer in stone, a seeker of bull's blood and lamb's flesh as well as male genitalia. He is very much a product not of the best minds, but of competent nomads who valued male strength and brutality. At times he's reduced to stupidity - as in the scenario where he flashed his hind quarters. And this thing created the universe!!!

[1213]

... it is not just "possible" man created the biblical God, but absolutely certain. Man has made beings more glorious, more moral, kinder, lovelier, happier....even more brutal that Yahweh. ..

I disagree with that, because atheists have so many difficulties in understanding what the Bible tells.

…Yahweh is restricted by his time, ..

I disagree with that because Bible has shown right knowledge about matters that happen long after it was written. For example, the scattering and gathering of Jews.

I will scatter you among the nations, and I will draw out the sword after you: and your land will be a desolation, and your cities shall be a waste.
Leviticus 26:33

….Yahweh your God will turn your captivity, and have compassion on you, and will return and gather you from all the peoples, where Yahweh your God has scattered you. If any of your outcasts are in the uttermost parts of the heavens, from there will Yahweh your God gather you, and from there will he bring you back:
Deuteronomy 30:1-4

[Tcg]

I disagree with that, because atheists have so many difficulties in understanding what the Bible tells.

A quick visit to the Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma sub forum reveals the fact that humans have a great deal of difficulty understanding the Bible, theists included and perhaps the primary group that qualifies.

Given how many theists claim to have divine guidance in understanding the Bible, there should be a clear consensus among them. No such consensus exists.

Perhaps God is the ultimate jokester and gives conflicting messages to his followers. He then sits back and enjoys the amusement of reading his followers argue endlessly and never reaching agreement.

Of course it's much more likely that, like God, the Bible is a human invention and humans use it and their personal version of God to push their personal agendas.


Tcg

[William]

[Replying to post 1]

marco:We have in Luke 24:51:


The Script: "While He was blessing them, He parted from them and was carried up into heaven."

marco: We now know that heaven is not in the area of the clouds. Of course in the time of Christ it was believed that the home of God was in the sky: heaven and sky are often the same.

Does this account show that there was fabrication, based on false beliefs?

William: Possibly.
Jesus of course is dealing with false belief systems which are opposed to many of the things he taught as "The Truth".
It seems likely - given the story as a whole...as in, the whole story we have access to regarding Jesus, that there was a significant amount of smoke and mirrors used in order to help convince those so inclined, to drop formative instruction and adopt the new...


marco: If Jesus knew heaven wasn't in the sky, why would he employ deception, rising to nowhere?

William: To instill belief in those who witnessed it. This would seem to be the best reason for any deception.
We know that those who enjoy being deceived will even pay to see the deception.
Ordinarily, those who do, understand that there is trickery afoot, so approach it as a form of entertainment...not so the case with Jesus and his followers, as they were not about entertaining...although water into wine might be delegated to a form of entertainment...
That is why such are called 'miracles' rather than 'magic', and 'prayer' rather than 'spell-casting'.


marco: Or is the account - as usual - figurative. Jesus was raised to eminence, but not literally.

William: It may indeed be that Jesus was using the ruse as a means of instilling the literal through use of the figurative.

In looking at the whole story we are unable to easily ignore the fact that before the supposed resurrection, he has a body which seemed able to achieve the supernatural/unnatural.
The story of the resurrection tends to give one the impression that it was through that process Jesus acquired the new body with its unnatural abilities, but the overall story itself, begs to differ.


marco: Or is the account - as usual - figurative. Jesus was raised to eminence, but not literally.

William: I don't think the story implies anything but literalness. Jesus seemed to be able to access both the Physical and Metaphysical Universes - even simultaneously.

In relation to Heaven (the Metaphysical Realm) and Earth (the Physical Realm) the sky is generally used as analogy for the relatively unknown, which The Kingdom of Heaven is, to those firmly planted in the Physical Universe.

We do understand now that the sky of the Physical Universe contains physical stuff, but its enormity is still a great analogy for The Kingdom of Heaven.

One could be pedantic and argue that 'the sky' is only really the Earths atmosphere. If so, then 'where' Jesus could have ascended to, is that which is beyond 'the sky'... and we know for sure that there is a 'beyond the sky'.

[liamconnor]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

This is one of the best questions I have met raised by a non Christian: it is based on real evidence, and lacks arrogance (which, truth be told, Marco, you often convey, and so I am pleasantly surprised).

An honest question; I hope an honest answer will suffice.

Only Luke records the ascension. Neither Mark nor Matthew say anything of it. Paul (the earliest writer of Christian origins) makes no explicit mention of it.

Thus the question is important: Did the earliest Christians believe that Jesus had physically been lifted up (levitating) and then disappeared? Or was the earliest belief simply that he was assumed into a new dimension, directionally represented as "up"?

The Bible is not unanimous on this. Only Acts unambiguously gives an account of the ascension, and one major theme of Acts is "Jesus as Lord and Sovereign in Heaven"; thus it would make sense for the author to invent a more imagineable story to facilitate this theme


Thus a physical, observable, ascension is not essential to the Christian faith. As far as language is concerned, sure, people will talk as if Jesus is "up there". But this proves nothing more than that language does not always represent actual thought: men north of Jerusalem talked of going "up" to Jerusalem; we still today talk of the sun "rising" as if it moved.

[William]

[Replying to post 25]

liamconnor: Thus a physical, observable, ascension is not essential to the Christian faith. As far as language is concerned, sure, people will talk as if Jesus is "up there". But this proves nothing more than that language does not always represent actual thought: men north of Jerusalem talked of going "up" to Jerusalem; we still today talk of the sun "rising" as if it moved.

William: Yes...there really is not such thing as 'up' or even 'down' as these are reflective of ideas from ancient human perspectives which have managed to stick around as seemingly truthful expressions.

In post #7 Zzyzx also makes a similar observation.

Truth is, there are only two directions "In" and "Out".

We can say we are going any direction relative to compass points, but even then, we are going both away (out) and toward, (in) which in terms of the planet itself, is "around"...but when one lifts away from the planet, one is not going 'up' at all, One is actually going "out".
Indeed, one can say if one makes a tunnel into the planet, one is going "in" but if one could tunnel right through the planet, one eventually would stop going 'in' and start going "out", all without changing the original direction one was moving.

[Willum]

Jesus ascended into our collective imaginations.
Rome invented a guy who said:
Pay Rome's tax, obey its pagan government, despite it being blasphemy, he was then killed by Rome for advocating this, then floated up beyond cross-examination.

To be endorsed by the Empire, happily ever after.

[SallyF]

Or "Heaven" is just sectarian slang for part of their religious building.

[1213]

I disagree with that, because atheists have so many difficulties in understanding what the Bible tells.

A quick visit to the Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma sub forum reveals the fact that humans have a great deal of difficulty understanding the Bible,...

To me that makes it even more clear that it is not just human production. If people would have made it, there wouldn’t be so much problems to fit it to human desires and it would be useful for the leaders and they would not have to lie about the book so much.

[Jagella]

A quick visit to the Theology, Doctrine, and Dogma sub forum reveals the fact that humans have a great deal of difficulty understanding the Bible,...

To me that makes it even more clear that it is not just human production. If people would have made it, there wouldn’t be so much problems to fit it to human desires and it would be useful for the leaders and they would not have to lie about the book so much.

But 1213, there are enormous difficulties reconciling the Bible and human nature not to mention that political leaders have found the Bible to be very useful. As for lying about the Bible, it's called "Christian apologetics."

So everything you said about the Bible coming from people fits what we know about the Bible.

Do you care to concede that the Bible was made up by people, or would you prefer to look for another argument that it could not have come from people?