Sermon Tone Analysis

Syntax:

Ascension of Christ.

Transference of the resurrected body of Jesus from this world to heaven.

Of the NT writers only Luke described Jesus’ ascension.

Acts 1:9–11 pictures a scene in which Jesus was “taken up” and disappeared into a cloud.

Luke 24:50, 51 and Acts 1:12 locate that final event near Bethany, east of Jerusalem on the Mt of Olives.

Matthew concluded his history before Pentecost, but John suggested the ascension in Jesus’ own comments: Jesus has departed, but he will return (21:22); he cannot be touched, for he must ascend (20:17); many will believe without having seen him (20:29).

Thus, the Gospels V 1, p 210 p 210 assume that (1) after the resurrection Jesus appeared to his disciples; (2) at some point in time those appearances ceased; and (3) although physically absent, Jesus is still spiritually present in his church.

Other NT writings agree.

The apostle Paul wrote that God raised Christ from the dead “and made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places” (Eph 1:20) or, as the writer of Hebrews put it, “at the right hand of the Majesty on high” (Heb 1:3).

The ascension, however, is more than merely a past event.

It has further significance in the NT which can be summarized under two headings: (1) its meaning for Christ and (2) its meaning for the Christian.

For Christ, the ascension is the necessary entrance into his heavenly “glorification” in which he sits on the right hand of the Father until his enemies become his footstool (Ps 110:1—the OT text most quoted in the NT).

The ascension is proof of his glorification and his superiority over such OT heroes as David (Acts 2:33–36).

By his ascension he rises over all and fills all (Eph 4:10), receiving “the name which is above every name” (Phil 2:9–11).

For the author of the Book of Hebrews the ascension is also proof of Christ’s superiority to angels; he sits enthroned while they are constantly being sent out to serve (Heb 1:13).

Angels, authorities, and powers are all subject to the ascended Christ (1 Tm 3:16; 1 Pt 3:22).

For the Christian, the ascension of Christ is meaningful in four ways.

First, without it there would be no gift of the Holy Spirit, who could not come until Jesus had ascended and sent him (Jn 16:7).

Without the ascension the church would have Jesus locally in one place, not spiritually present “wherever two or three are gathered” (Mt 18:20; cf.

28:20).

Second, since a truly human Jesus has ascended to heaven, human beings can also ascend there.

Jesus went “to prepare a place” for his followers (Jn 14:2).

The hope of those who are “in Christ” is that they will eventually ascend to be with him (2 Cor 5:1–10).

Third, the ascension proves that the sacrifice of Christ is finished and accepted by God.

Jesus has passed through the heavens (Heb 4:14) and entered the presence of God (Heb 6:20), which is described as the inner sanctuary of the heavenly temple, the real temple of which the one on earth was a copy (Heb 9:24).

Having brought a single, once-for-all sacrifice to God (Heb 9:12), Christ sat down (Heb 1:3; 10:12; 12:2), showing that no repetition of his sacrifice is necessary.

Fourth, the ascension means that there is a human being in heaven who sympathizes with humanity and can therefore intercede on humanity’s behalf (1 Jn 2:1).

Jesus has experienced everything humans experience—birth, growth, temptation, suffering, and death—and therefore he can serve effectively as an intermediary before God in heaven (Heb 2:17; 5:7–10).

Christ’s ascension assures the church that God understands the human situation and that Christians can therefore approach him boldly in their prayers (Heb 4:14–16).

Thus Christ’s ascension is an indispensable aspect of NT teaching.

It is the basis for recognition of Christ’s exalted status and for the Christian’s confidence and hope.

PETER H. DAVIDS

Acts 1:8

ἔσεσθέ μου μάρτυρες

But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the farthest part of the earth.”

Most manuscripts have “you shall be my witnesses,” but a few instead have “you shall be witnesses to me.”

In both instances the speaker is the Lord.

The first instance is more concerned with the testimony of the person; the second is more concerned with what is testified.

2) Luke’s following of the rhetorical conventions about variation in style when one is retelling something.

(3) The recapitulative character of Acts 1:1–11 is important to bear in mind if the reader is not to be distracted unnecessarily by questions concerning multiple and conflicting accounts of the ascension.

Lucian advises the historian: “the first and second topics must not merely be neighbors but have common matter and overlap” (How to Write History 55).

In Luke 24 the account serves as a means of closing the first volume, but in Acts 1 the story of the ascension and final instructions serves to initiate what follows.

In Luke 24 Luke has telescoped his accounts, so that the impression implicitly given is that all took place on one day (cf.

24:1, 13, 28, 36, 50),14 whereas in Acts Luke speaks of a “forty”-day period when Jesus appeared to the disciples and thus “presented himself alive to them by many convincing proofs.”15

Forty is of course conventional biblical number, but the point is that it refers to considerable period of time, not just one day.

This latter impression of an extended period of appearances is also what the close of Matthew, John, and 1 Corinthians 15 suggest.

The reference to many convincing τεκμηριοις in v. 3 is important, for this is a technical term for a “necessary proof” (see Aristotle, Rhetor.

1.2.16f.).

Quintilian (Inst.

Or. 5.9.3) puts it more strongly: τεκμηρια are things which involve conclusion, “those which cannot be otherwise are called τεκμηρια by the Greeks, because they are indications from which there is no getting away.”

In other words, Luke believes the resurrection appearances of Jesus are strong, irrefutable proofs that Jesus is alive, providing basis for all that follows, including the sending of the Spirit, the creation of the church, the success of the Christian mission.

That Luke stresses that Jesus gave such proofs that he was alive indicates already that he is engaged in volume two, as he was in volume one, in the art of persuasion, in apologetics, in order to strengthen or confirm Theophilus in his faith.16

Equally important is the evidence D. L. Mealand has generated using the TLG, showing that the phrase “many proofs” is very rare in Greek literature except in Greek historiographical works (cf.

Josephus, Ant.

3.317–18; Diodorus Siculus 3.66.4.4;

Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Ant.

Rom.

1.90.2.2).17

Here is probably another small hint that Luke is indebted to and writing in a Hellenistic historiographical mode.

It may be worthwhile to consider what function the ascension has in Luke’s narrative, since he is the only Evangelist who really mentions such an idea, and does so in both of his volumes.

It may not be accidental that his audience is Gentile, for Gentiles were well familiar with the idea of gods or semidivine figures materializing on earth in disguise and then being transported back into the heavens,18 but were much less familiar with the idea of resurrection, unless they had had some contact with Judaism.

Thus it is resurrection that Luke must be convincing about, and it must be distinguished from pagan notions of various sorts.

Nevertheless, the christological implications of this narrative for a Gentile audience familiar with the deification accounts of figures like Herakles should not be overlooked.

Jesus is being portrayed here as a human yet divine figure worthy of a place in heaven alongside the Creator of the universe.

Luke stresses that the resurrected Jesus was no mere spirit but was tangible and could eat and drink with the disciples (cf.

Luke 24:30, 37–39, 41–43).

That is, in Luke’s view the resurrection appearances were not merely visions from heaven, but happenings on earth.

Thus, the ascension serves the function of making clear to the disciples (and in this case to Theophilus) that Jesus’ life on earth had a definite closure, after the resurrection appearances.

The disciples will not be called upon to be witnesses to any transcendent events, but only to things they saw and heard while Jesus was on earth—in particular, the resurrection appearances.19

The subject of Jesus’ messages after the resurrection is stated in v. 3 to be the dominion of God, which binds the content of Jesus’ earthly teaching to that about which the disciples will instruct others to the very end of Acts (cf.

8:12; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23, 31).

Luke is concerned with various continuities throughout Acts.

The continuity between the ministry of Jesus and that of his followers (including both the message and the empowering presence of the Spirit), the continuity between Judaism and Christianity, the continuity between OT prophecy and the events that transpired among Jesus’ followers both before and after Easter (and Pentecost).

This concern is understandable in the first century, because the one thing bound to offend many pagans in the Empire was a religion that was too new, a religion which could not claim a lengthy pedigree going back into hoary antiquity.20

Jesus identifies the Holy Spirit as “the promise of the Father,” thus connecting it with OT prophecy, which prepares us for what follows in Acts 2:16–22.

In view of the parallelism of vv.

3–4 it seems likely that in Luke’s mind the coming of the kingdom or dominion of God is synonymous with, or at least closely associated with, the coming of the Holy Spirit in power (cf.

Luke 11:13, 20).21

This last conclusion is confirmed by what follows in vv.

4b–5, where we are told that what Jesus taught during his ministry was about being baptized by or with the Holy Spirit in contradistinction to John’s baptism, which was merely by or with water.

The promise of baptism with the Holy Spirit in v. 5 also carries with it a time limit—“not many days” from now.

It is possible that Luke arrived at the forty-day-appearance period by calculating back from the date of Pentecost, which of course was fifty days after Passover,22 and then allowing for a few extra days after the ascension.

The issue of timing here is brought up in more than one connection.

The promise of the Spirit in “not many days” prompts the question, “Is this the time when you will restore the kingdom to Israel?” (v.

6).23

It is a natural question not only in view of the connection in Luke’s thought between the pouring out of the Spirit and the coming of the kingdom, but also because of the speculations in early Judaism about the restoration of the land (cf.

Sir.

48:10, the LXX of Mal.

3:23).

In terms of Lukan theology, what this verse shows is that while Luke does believe that the coming of the Spirit inaugurates the kingdom, he does not believe that that is all there is to be said about the kingdom.

This verse suggests that God will one day fulfill his promises to Israel, in fact that God has already set that time and determined the interval before it by his own authority, but that human speculation about the timing of such an event is unfruitful, since only God knows that timing and he is not revealing it to mortals.24

What this also shows is that Luke believes, not surprisingly, that many early followers of Jesus believed in the restoration of the control of the land to Israel (cf.

Luke 24:21).

What vv. 6–8, which should be read closely together, indicate is not merely the delay in the restoration of Israel but also that in the interim there are important things to be accomplished.

V. 8 should be seen as briefly announcing the tasks that need to be completed before “the restoration,” namely, witnessing in Jerusalem, in all of Judea and Samaria, “and to the ends of the earth.”

This last phrase has often been thought to refer to Rome (Pss.

Sol.

8:15).

In other words, as H. Conzelmann pointed out, v. 8 is seen as to a certain extent programmatic for Acts.25 Yet it is possible to see this verse as programmatic without identifying Rome with the ends of the earth, since Acts 28 is an intentionally open-ended conclusion.26

It is programmatic in the sense that it alludes to a worldwide mission, and probably also to a mission to both Jew and Gentile in the Diaspora, not that it alludes to Rome.27

This verse also announces one of, if not the major, theme(s) of Acts.

Witnesses, empowered by the Holy Spirit, are sent out from Jerusalem in various directions.

This statement is in some ways as significant for what it does not say as for what it mentions.

Notice that no clear mention is made of witnessing to Gentiles.

Luke also does not mention witnessing in Galilee here, even though of course he knows that both Jesus and the first disciples were Galileans (cf.

Luke 24:6; Acts 2:7), and he knows that in due course there were Christian disciples in Galilee (Acts 9:31).