Download an outline of the Creed.
Go to the beginning of this study of the Creed.
Download the handout.
Table Talk: If we did not have Luke’s account of the ascension, what other ways might the story of Jesus’ earthly ministry have ended?
[“Table Talk” is an opening question or topic for discussion at the beginning of our time together. The intent is to help group members (around tables, with four to six at each table) build connections with each other, as well as to guide thinking in a direction related to the passage.]
When is the last time you heard a sermon on the ascension? As we approach the season of Lent and then Easter, we will hear a lot about the last days of Jesus’ earthly life, His crucifixion, and His glorious resurrection. Those are fitting topics. But what about the ascension? What difference does the ascension make? What if we had no record of it? What would the story of Jesus look like without the ascension?
Our group briefly discussed the “Table Talk” question about “alternative endings” to the story after the resurrection. What if He just vanished (as He was capable of doing in Luke 24:31)? What if He went up on a mountain to pray (His frequent habit) and just never came down. What if He left Jerusalem and just was never seen again? Would that make a difference in how we understand the gospel, His ministry, our salvation, and God’s mission?
Only two passages deal explicitly with the event of the ascension, although many others refer to it more or less indirectly. (See the section on Exaltation later in this article.) The gospel according to Luke ends with a description of the ascension. His second volume, the Acts of the Apostles, begins with the same story told a little differently (another question we explored later in our discussion). The description of the ascension in Mark 16:19 is part of the “longer ending” added to Mark’s original Gospel at a later date, not part of Mark’s original writing.[1] Yet despite only two clear descriptions in the New Testament (both by the same author) the ascension is mentioned in the brief words of the Apostles’ Creed and the later Nicene Creed. Apparently the ancient church leaders were convinced of its importance. One of the goals of our discussion was to think about why the ascension holds such prominence. Why does the Creed include seemingly obscure theological issues?
There were several suggestions about the importance of the ascension. In a culture ruled by Rome, the ascension of a ruler to his earthly throne was a clear mark of his status and authority, so perhaps the ascension of Jesus served as a reminder or confirmation of His kingly authority. An ascension would demonstrate that His resurrected form exceeded our usual understanding of a physical body. One person responded to that comment with caution. We must not think of the ascension as only spiritual or ethereal or ghostly. Jesus’ body was more than physical, but it was not less than physical. The ascension clearly indicated something supernatural was going on. His visible departure left room for the anticipation of a visible return (as was confirmed in the Acts 1 passage we looked at later in our discussion). The ascension also testified to the genuineness of Jesus’ ministry. He was not one more false Messiah who rose to fame and then faded away. He was also not the Messiah they were expecting, a military leader to rout the Romans. When He ascended, the powerful, oppressive political structure was essentially unchanged. The ascension changed the disciples’ conception of the role of the Messiah.
The Testimony
We considered two passages: Luke 24:44-53 and Acts 1:1-12. The handout was laid out to show the two passages side-by-side for easy comparison. The similarities and differences between the two accounts prompted our discussion. Both passages mention several key ideas:
- The promise of the Father (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4)
- Staying in the city, Jerusalem (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:4)
- Being witnesses beginning in Jerusalem (Luke 24:47; Acts 1:8)
- Supernatural power (Luke 24:49; Acts 1:8)
- The moment of the ascension (Luke 24:51; Acts 1:9)
A similarity that is perhaps less obvious is the way the ascension is described in both passages. In Luke 24 He “was carried up into heaven” (v. 51). In Acts 1 He “was taken up” (v. 2), “was lifted up” (v. 9a), and “a cloud received Him” (v. 9b). Every description of the actual event uses a passive verb. Someone else was involved. As Jesus repeatedly emphasized, His mission was from the Father. He was continuously doing the will and the work of the Father (John 10:18; 12:49; 14:31; 15:10, etc.). This seems to be one more final earthly example of Jesus following the will and the initiative of the Father. While the grammar of those descriptions may be passive, the actual event was very active in the work of the Father and the obedience of the Son.
Reading the two passages also exposes differences between Luke’s two descriptions. The Luke passage includes slightly more detail on the final teaching Jesus imparted (Luke 24:44-47), while Acts simply says that during those last forty days He was “speaking of the tings concerning the kingdom of God” (Acts 1:3). In Luke, Jesus gives a general mission to “all the nations, beginning in Jerusalem” (v. 47), but Acts contains a more particular strategy, including the fact that even the Samaritans were included (v. 8). In Luke’s Gospel the expected power is “from on high” (v. 49b), but Acts is more explicit about the Holy Spirit (v. 5, 8). Perhaps most noticeably, the account in Acts includes a question from the disciple and a response from Jesus. The Gospel Luke wrote says nothing about any questions from the disciples. The scene in Acts ends with two men in white clothing urging the disciples to begin their mission since Jesus will be returning. No men in white at the ascension are mentioned in Luke.[2]
Our group considered the two accounts and the different ways Luke presented the description of the same incident. Why would he do that? One participant felt that the account in the Gospel was clear while the description in Acts was confusing, bringing in a variety of different or even tangential topics. Do the two passages fit together? If so, how?
One way to compare passages like this is to consider how the two descriptions might be woven together. A “harmony of the Gospels” takes all four Gospels and shows them in four parallel columns to suggest how the different accounts fit together. A possible “harmony” of these two passages offers a quite plausible combined description of the ascension.
Differences in descriptions by one writer (with both descriptions under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit) may be due to different purposes.
- In Luke’s Gospel the ascension is the end of the story of the earthly ministry of Jesus. There Luke includes a broad summary of Jesus teaching on “the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms” (v. 44) and the point of His passion (v. 46) and the thumbnail sketch of their mission (v. 47).
- In Luke’s book of the Acts of the Apostles the ascension is the beginning of the mission of the church in the power of the Holy Spirit. Luke mentions the earlier ministry and teaching of Jesus (v. 3), but He is much more explicit about the coming of the Holy Spirit (“not many days from now” in v. 5) and the trajectory of the mission they would follow (v. 8). The urgency of the mission that was to follow in the rest of the book of Acts was highlighted by the admonition of the “two men in white clothing” (v. 11).
The summary of the earthly ministry of Jesus in the Gospel and the motivation for mission in Acts fit together as two descriptions of the same historical event told with different purposes. Luke, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, knew what he was writing about.
The Significance
What conclusions or significance can we draw from these two passages? What was so important for the ancient church to insist on acknowledging the ascension in the Creed?
Completion
The ascension marks the successful completion of Jesus’ earthly ministry. As He was described just before washing the feet of the disciples, “He had come forth from God and was going back to God” (John 13:3). The ascension (remember those passive verbs?) indicated the Father welcoming Him back. “That Jesus, the Resurrected, ‘ascended into heaven’ does not imply a geographical event, but rather a return to the starting point of his mission.”[3] “What we have in the ascension is a mixture of visual marvel, strange metaphor, and utter mystery. We learn first and foremost that Jesus is taken away in such a manner as to leave clear in the minds of observers that he has gone to be with the Father in heaven.”[4]
Initiation
If the ascension marked the end of the ministry of Jesus on earth, it also signaled the true beginning of the ministry of His followers. “The ascension tells us something about the continuing work of Jesus in the world!”[5]
“In the aftermath of Jesus’s ascension, the early church naturally looked to Jesus’s disciples, the apostles, for leadership and instruction.”[6] What must have the disciples been thinking as they watched their Lord disappear into a cloud? “What do we do now?” One member of our group suggested their emotional state might be similar to new parents first arriving home with a first baby – no doctors, no nurses anywhere in sight. We are on our own – what do we do? How can we do this?
Intimacy
The disciples would soon learn the answer to that question. “The ascension of Christ is not a distancing from us but the condition for a new form of intimacy with us.”[7] The limited physical presence of Christ was replaced by the indwelling Holy Spirit (John 14:16-17, 15:26; 16:7; Acts 1:8). The wisdom of the ancient church fathers including the ascension in the Creed begins to be a little clearer: “When we confess that Jesus ascended into heaven, this comes with the promise of the Holy Spirit, who dwells in us (Romans 8:9-11). This means God is participating in our lives in a more intimate way than ever before.[8]
Identification
A few weeks ago we discussed the reality of the humanness of Jesus. Because He became like us, He can identify with us and sympathize with our weakness. That condition continues through the ascension. “The ascension of Jesus means that his incarnation is not over. …The one who rose from the dead and who ascended into heaven is still one of us!”[9]
He still shares in our flesh and blood (Hebrews 2:14). He is still like us in all things (Hebrews 2:17). He still remembers what suffering and temptation are like (Hebrews 2:18). The Apostle John emphasized His continuing incarnation: “By this you know the Spirit of God: every spirit that confesses that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is from God” (1 John 4:1-3). The grammar of that verse is important. Notice that the criterion of spirits John gives is not that “Jesus Christ came in the flesh” as if it was an event in history that happened and is now just a memory. Jesus Christ “has come in the flesh” is a perfect tense, indicating an event in history with continuing results. The idea is “the progress of an act or state to a point of culmination and the existence of its finished results.”[10] Jesus is still in the flesh, in a body that could vanish (Luke 24:31) and appear in a locked room (John 20:19) but could also show the disciples His wounds and eat a piece of fish (Luke 24:43). John made the endless incarnation a test of orthodoxy. The church fathers included the ascension in the Creed for the same reason.
Intercession
In addition to His continuing identification with us, the ascension places Jesus in the presence of God the Father representing us. “For Christ has entered, not into holy places made with hands, which are copies of the true things, but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God on our behalf” (Hebrews 9:24). “It was not enough that Jesus rose again from the dead. By itself, this signals eternal life only for him. But because Jesus ascended into heaven, where he is even now seated at the right hand of God the Father, he can bring us with him.”[11]
Exaltation
The ascension was not only to heaven in some vague general sense, as if heaven meant the physical sky. His destination was much more precise, to the right hand of the Father. “The ascension indicates the beginnings of a Trinitarian worship focused on the Lord Jesus and God the Father, operating in the power of the Spirit.”[12] “And they, after worshiping Him, returned to Jerusalem with great joy, and were continually in the temple praising God” (Luke 24:52). Jesus had “opened their minds to understand the Scriptures” (v. 45). That new supernatural insight from the Lord Himself along with the physical evidence of the ascension were finally enough. They began to have at least an inkling of the eternal relationship between the Father and the Son, and soon they would know a lot more about the Holy Spirit. The seeds of the worship of the Triune God were beginning to emerge.
The description of the event of the ascension may have been mentioned only in the two related passages by Luke, but the implications of the ascension are scattered through the New Testament. “Similar to the language about Jesus’ enthronement is that about his “exaltation” (see Acts 2:31; 5:31; John 3:14; 8:28; 12:32, 34), and of his “entering glory” (see Luke 24:26; Acts 7:55; 1 Cor 15:40-43; 2 Cor 4:6; Phil 3:21; 1 Tim 3:16; Heb 2:7, 9; 1 Pet 1:11; Rev 5:12-13), and of his being “glorified” (see John 12:16; 13:31-32; 17:5; Acts 3:13).[13] This will be an important part of our discussion next week about “seated at the right hand of the Father.”
Imminence
The incarnation did not end with the ascension. Jesus ministry on earth did not end because the Holy Spirit soon arrived in power. Even bodily presence of Jesus on earth was not ended but only temporarily suspended at the ascension. “The certainty of Jesus’s future return is rooted in the reality of his ascension into heaven.”[14] As astonishing as it must have been to watch Him ascend bodily, that amazement was not intended to be the focus. ““Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into the sky? This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11). The ascension was not just one more miracle to tell others about. The ascension is the final reassurance that He will return. Like Jesus in verse 7, the two men in white have nothing to say about the timing of His return. For almost two millennia the church has looked back to that event and their words in the hope of the nearness, the imminent return that could happen at any moment. In difficult times, the ascension should provide us with that same reassurance.
Asking the Right Questions
One of the differences mentioned above between the account in the Gospel and the account in Acts is the question the disciples asked. Luke does not mention it at the end of the story of Jesus’ earthly ministry. On the other hand, he gives the question and the response from Jesus a prominent place as he begins the story of the church’s mission. For us to understand and appreciate the ascension and its significance for us, we need to ask the right questions (which apparently the disciples did not).
What’s wrong with this question?
“The apostles ask, ‘Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’ (Acts 1:6). It seems like an innocent enough question at first. But John Calvin comments, ‘There are as many errors in this question as words.’”[15]
Our group discussed what problems might be in that seemingly modest question.
- They were interested only in the timing. How often do we become frustrated when we don’t know God’s timing? Or when we know it and don’t like it?
- They were still looking for a dramatic start of the kingdom. Jesus had just spent almost six weeks telling them about the kingdom (Acts 1:3), presumably echoing His earlier words about the presence of the kingdom (Matthew 10:7, Luke 20-21) growing slowly like a mustard seed or leaven in dough (Luke 13:18-21). The disciples still wanted something bigger and more impressive. How often do we miss the small signs of the kingdom – a changed life or a victory over a bad habit or a poor person fed?
- They were expecting Him to make something happen. Trusting and depending on God is a key part of the Christian life, but they may not have realized that in a few moments He would leave and they (with the power of the Holy Spirit) would have responsibilities for the mission of the growing and expanding kingdom.
- They lost sight of the mission of Jesus as sent from the Father. They seemed to think He would decide when and where the kingdom (or their vision of it) should start. Jesus had made it clear that the Father was in charge of that decision.
- They had the myopic, nationalistic view of Israel as the sole heir of the kingdom:
Even after the resurrection, the apostles themselves show they don’t yet fully understand Jesus’ role. Clearly, they were still expecting him to restore self-rule and theocracy for the nation of Israel. Instead, God was calling them beyond narrow national interests to serving their neighbors (both Jew and Greek) and going out to the ends of the earth in mission. Do you see any connections here with those who sometimes seemed more concerned with restoring political authority to Christians than with serving their neighbors missionally?[16]
Jesus responded to their question:
- He gently corrected them, “It is not for you to know times or epochs which the Father has fixed by His own authority.”
- He provided amazing encouragement, “but you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you.”
- He gave them a vision-expanding, overwhelming mission, “you shall be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and even to the remotest part of the earth” (Acts 1:7-8).
We can (and must) learn from the disciples’ misplaced question. How can we understand the ascension as the link between the earthly ministry of Jesus and the continuing ministry of the church? What should we be asking? Where do we need more trust in God’s timing? What confirmations of the kingdom are we overlooking in our desire for extraordinary evidences? How can we more fully understand the Trinitarian nature of God’s larger story – for the Father, through the Son, by the Holy Spirit? Where do our expectations rely more on political impact than submissive service to others?
May He provide us with gentle correction, amazing encouragement, and a vision-expanding mission.
[1] The IVP Bible Background Commentary (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 183.
[2] However, one author points out similarities with the “two men in dazzling clothing” at the empty tomb, Luke 24:4-6. Those two men also has a question and a correction for the followers of Jesus. See Luke Timothy Johnson, The Creed: What Christians Believe and Why it Matters (New York: Doubleday, 2003), 189-190.
[3] Hans Urs von Balthasar, Credo: Meditations on the Apostles’ Creed, trans. David Kipp, (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), Kindle Edition, location 458.
[4] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), 162; Kindle Edition location 2610.
[5] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), 161; Kindle Edition location 2601.
[6] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), 32; Kindle Edition location 433.
[7] Luke Timothy Johnson, The Creed: What Christians Believe and Why it Matters (New York: Doubleday, 2003), 188.
[8] Raymond F. Cannata & Joshua D. Reitano, Rooted: the Apostles’ Creed (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Doulos Resources, 2013), Kindle Edition location 1887.
[9] Justo L. Gonzalez, The Apostles’ Creed for Today (Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 2007), 62.
[10] H. E. Dana and Julius R. Mantey, A Manual Grammar of the Greek New Testament (Toronto: The MacMillan Company, 1957), 200.
[11] Raymond F. Cannata & Joshua D. Reitano, Rooted: the Apostles’ Creed (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Doulos Resources, 2013), Kindle Edition location 1838.
[12] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), 163; Kindle Edition location 2633.
[13] Luke Timothy Johnson, The Creed: What Christians Believe and Why it Matters (New York: Doubleday, 2003), 187.
[14] Michael F. Bird, What Christians Ought to Believe (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan, 2016), 163; Kindle Edition location 2633.
[15] Raymond F. Cannata & Joshua D. Reitano, Rooted: the Apostles’ Creed (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Doulos Resources, 2013), Kindle Edition location 1932.
[16] Raymond F. Cannata & Joshua D. Reitano, Rooted: the Apostles’ Creed (Murfreesboro, Tennessee: Doulos Resources, 2013), Kindle Edition location 2017.