|
comparative religion >>
general articles >> an affair on golgotha >>
an affair on golgotha
THE ASCENSION
Jesus never left Judaism. He did not forsake the Law, nor did he fail to remind others of it and demand that they follow it. His teachings fell within that of the Rabbinical schools of his day, and his beliefs stood firmly within the doctrine of the orthodox. We have no reason to believe that the Apostles would fail to follow his example.
Whether they were ready or not Jesus' ministry had ended and he was gone. They alone were witness to his work, and they were left alone to carry it on. Within the context of what we know as, The Jerusalem Church, eleven men remained to preach the good news. Peter was to be the foundation of the new faith.
But where was their master? The only event left to examine, and that very briefly, is the Ascension. Very little of this purely spiritual event is attested to in the New Testament, and we are forced to view the works of theologians who offer a confusing mixture of statements on the subject.
If, the ascension is a product of the Church's doctrine and is not biblical, the Gospels will reveal the truth to us. We have strong evidence that in the first century church, there was no ascension tradition, as there was no doctrine concerning a 'virgin birth', a 'holy trinity', and a 'Christmas birth narrative'.. This is, again, one more fine detail that contributes to the belief that Jesus did not die on the cross.
Acts 1:2, presents another dilemma –filled theological question concerning Jesus' ascension into heaven.
"The text of the opening sentence of Acts circulated in several different forms in the early church. The ordinary text, witnessed by all extant ancient Greek manuscripts with the exception of codex Bezae, can be rendered, with the RSV, as follows:
"In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach, until the day that he was taken up, after he had given commandment through the Holy Spirit to the Apostles whom he had chosen." (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament: Bruce M. Metzger: Page 273)
"Another form of the Western text, which does not involve the difficulties exhibited by the Bezan text, is preserved in several old Latin witnesses, particularly in codex Gigas and in the quotations of Augustine and Vigilius… Blass, followed by Clark and, in most respects, by Ropes, reconstructed the Greek text."
"(In the first book, O Theophilus, I have dealt with all that Jesus began to do and teach,) on the day when he chose the Apostles through the Holy Spirit and commanded them to proclaim the Gospel." (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament: Bruce M. Metzger: Page 274)
In criticism over the deletion, or, addition of the ascension statement, Metzger makes the following comment.
Metzger is quick to point out that (1) there is no mention of the ascension; (2) the 'day', which is specified, is the occasion during Jesus' public ministry when he chose the Apostles.
Ropes and Clark, whose text-critical views usually differ from each other, agree in this case that this form of the Western text must be regarded as original, and the Alexandrian as corrupt.
However intellectuals may debate over the 'fact' of the ascension, this is an act that faith alone can accept or deny. No human pen can ever form an argument that will decide the issue one way or another. Metzger also points out the following.
"If, however, for the sake of the argument it be assumed that a Greek text once existed which lacked reference to the ascension, its origin can be explained on the basis of either doctrinal or stylistic reasons." (A Textual Commentary On The Greek New Testament: Bruce M. Metzger: Page 276-277)
The Gospel according to Mark tells us that the women were first to the tomb. It was empty. There was no witness to Jesus' appearance to the women or anyone else. Accordingly, there is no ascension in Mark.
In Matthew and John, the women see Jesus first, in Jerusalem. Paul ignores any such evidence since he has no knowledge of a tomb scene, and he refuses to report any visitation to women, but only to the Apostles. There is no ascension narrated by Matthew or John.
Luke, a much later Gospel and written to one who was subservient to Paul, is loyal in his adhering to that one's self-proclaimed theology. He does not report the women having seen Jesus, and in fact, has him appear first to two men never before mentioned in the Bible. Cleopus was certainly not one of the Apostles, therefore denying Jesus' words of instruction and bringing great question to Luke's interpretation of the events.
Luke has Jesus lifted into heaven in the last line of the Gospel. It supports Paul's designs, but not the reports of the other Gospel stories.
"While he blessed them, he parted from them, and was carried up into heaven." (Luke 24:51)
A fact that bears witness to the disclaimer of Jesus' presumed death on the cross is the practice of the disciples. There was no 'communion meal' within the Primitive Church (The Jerusalem Church). They did not memorialize a death on the cross, but a celebration of the coming meal they would share with Jesus upon his return. Unhappily, the Gospel stories have been tainted by Paul's manipulations.
To enforce his repudiation of the principals set up by Jesus' disciples, Paul inserts the words, "this do in remembrance of me." Paul claimed that this was his instruction from the risen Christ.
Mark this well. He, Paul, inserted the words that were later to become the basis of the Communion sacrament practiced by the Church. This do in remembrance of me, are not the words of Jesus, they were never part of the original Gospels, but are an addendum taken from I Corinthians.
Our only other clue to the truth is revealed by the manner in which the date of Easter is calculated. It is determined by the rituals of a pagan rite, the phases of the moon connected with the celebration of the, Rite of Spring, according to the practice in Mythranism.
Why isn't Easter celebrated on the actual date of Jesus' purported death?
Josephus records it as 33 AD, April 3. He is the most authoritative historian we have from that period, far superior to those who wrote the Greek Gospels. This information is available by calculating the date of the Passover on 14 Nissan, in the years 31 AD, 32 AD, and 33AD.
The only conclusion we can come to is that Jesus did not die on the cross, therefore, how could one realistically celebrate his death on any given date? Instead, the Church substituted a pagan festival and applied that rule to the celebration of Easter.
Another indicator, which enhances our conclusion, comes from the Baptism, Jesus' first act in validating the Law of Moses.
John's was a baptism of repentance. He baptized with water. He indicated that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. In all texts, the Holy Spirit is indicated in the Greek as, Pneuma agio(n). (A Lexicon And Concordance to the English-Greek New Testament: Bullinger: Page 381) This indicates the gift of the Holy Spirit and not the Holy Spirit himself.
The gift in this case is forgiveness. Jesus' baptism was for the forgiveness of sins. If this is the case, why is the washing of regeneration in his blood, the blood offering of a human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins, even necessary? The deed had already been accomplished.
Evidence of this is found in the practice of the early church where the baptism that replaced John's was a baptism given, "in the name of the Lord Jesus."
If one accepts traditions' dictates then the ascension is vital to their faith. If one accepts the 'saved' Jesus then the resurrection becomes his return to the table of his Apostles. In this case, there is no immediate ascension. In speaking for the latter, it is a Gospel story that thousands of martyrs have given their lives to protect. The ascension, however, remains the accepted doctrine of those who believe in Jesus' death on the cross.
One must also understand that for hundreds of millions of the faithful, the ascension is totally unnecessary. The living Jesus is the beacon leading to the path of redemption through his actions and his verbal teachings.
"Call to mind when the angels said to Mary: Allah through His word, gives thee glad tidings of a son named Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, honored in this world and the next, and of those who are granted nearness to Allah." (The Holy Qur'an: Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Chapter 3:46)
"Indeed, the Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was but a messenger of Allah…" (The Holy Qur'an: Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Chapter 4:172)
In the end, Jesus is lifted up into heaven by God. It is expressed in a manner in which only the Holy Qur'an could assert its beauty.
"…and we made the son of Mary and his mother a sign, and gave them shelter on a pleasant plateau with springs of running water." (The Holy Qur'an: Muhammad Zafrulla Khan: Chapter 4:172)
The ascension is accomplished even though the time and circumstances are not as doctrine would have them. Though the manner of our understanding may seem different due to our cultures and our histories, we accomplish the same confession.
Only now does the process of future events begin to unfold. As we have already seen, one had indeed come into the world who would change the course of the church from the faith of the Apostles to the intellectualism and mysticism of the Hellenistic world. And then would deny that congregation the right to reason. Our understanding of this period in biblical history must begin with the Jerusalem Church, the body of faith that lay with Jesus' chosen disciples.
Paul's ministry was assaulted by Jewish Christians known to us as the, Judiazers. These individuals, empowered by, if not themselves Jesus' disciples, carried on a Jewish faith as practiced and instructed by Jesus himself. He did not come to destroy, but to fulfill. Surely then, this must have been the genuine Church. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 21)
"The first believers were not neophytes in religion. Belonging, many of them, to the 'pious of the land', they were not only acquainted with synagogal forma, but had precedents for the organization of their life in various groups of dedicated people within Judaism, who had drawn up rules for their life together." (Peake's Commentary on the Bible: Thomas Nelson & Sons LTD: Page 870b)
Being Jews, the Apostles continued to be fervent for the law, observed the normal holidays and festivals of Judaism, which included Pentacost, and never considered themselves anything other than Jews. Their difference lay in the knowledge that Jesus was Messiah, and to this knowledge they constantly pointed.
"They took no interest in any mission to the Samaritans or to Gentiles, since they considered that the Messiah was 'sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 215; I)
This was the message that Jesus himself continued to verbalize throughout his ministry. When he dealt with Gentiles, it was on an individual basis. He never denied those who came to him on the foundation of personal faith, yet he never condoned a mission to them as a part of his calling.
And they believed that an instantaneous judgment would take place when Jesus returned. This they thought would come within a very short time, and the common meal was practiced as an anticipated meal with Jesus upon his return. There was no communion meal within the practice of the Apostles! Another indicator.
Despite the fact that Sunday became celebrated as, The Lord's Day, the disciples and their congregation continued to honor the Sabbath. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 215; I)
"Nothing was required of the orthodox Jew but to conform to the ordinances of the law, and in matters of opinion he was left free… Whatever might be their beliefs, they were faithful in their observance of the law, and the religious authorities could take no measures against them… Their views might be erroneous but it was clear that in religious practices they did nothing contrary to the law." (Peake's Commentary on the Bible: Thomas Nelson & Sons LTD: Page 870d)
Everything, however, began to come apart when the Hellenists became involved with the Church. Arguments began within the congregation itself and spread to those outside that institution. (The Interpreter's Bible: Volume 7; Page 181)
The Hellenists, especially Stephen, were insistent that the role of Judaism was over and that the religion was dead. Such preaching within the Jewish community could do nothing but cause serious trouble. If such outrageous speeches were made in our day and age, against Christianity, you may be sure it would likely end up in the same way in orthodox, die-hard circles.
"To Stephen Israel had been apostate throughout her history; her rejection of Jesus is merely the culmination of a series of misdeeds. Christianity must break with Judaism because the two are incompatible." (Peake's Commentary on the Bible: Thomas Nelson & Sons LTD; Page 871 70d)
It is apparent from these statements, validated by outside sources, that Hellenistic activity and their anti-Jewish attitudes would have planted the seed for a Gentile-Christian movement without the questionable assistance of Saul of Tarsus. In fact, history shows us that their very dispersal due to the incident with Stephen had already started this event many years before Paul's figure even begins its ministry.
Stephen left the community with no choice. The revolutionary temper of his words and actions brought down a torrent of reprisal, and resulted with his death. With this act, the Hellenists were forced to leave Jerusalem under the burden of persecution, but this did not affect Peter and the other Apostles, those of the Judo-Christian assemblage.
"The persecution that broke out probably touched the Hellenists only. Acts merely states that the Apostles remained in the city, and they are unlikely to have remained there unless there were other Christians around them. And had the persecution been general they themselves would hardly have escaped it." (Peake's Commentary on the Bible: Thomas Nelson & Sons LTD; Page 871 760e)
This 'calm' period seems to have lasted for some eleven to twelve years before the growing tension between Jew and Gentile resulted in the death of James, the son of Zebedee, and the imprisonment of Peter in 44 AD. At that point it is believed that James, Jesus' brother became the head of the Church, but very little is known about the Jerusalem Church between 44 AD and 70 AD.
We get some help here from, The Gospel According to Thomas, Page 9: Log 12; 25-30.
"The disciples said to Jesus: We know that thou wilt go away from us. Who is it who shall be great over us? Jesus said to them: Wherever you have come, you will go to James the righteous for whose sake heaven and earth came into being."
Here a word of caution is advised. If the Bible lacks one great quality, it is in properly advising us as to the passage of time. Events would appear to take place one right after the other, without deference to the intervals of time that lapsed between them. Even when spans of time are discussed, they are confusing at best.
For all intents and purposes, the faith of the Apostles, as carried on in a Jewish Christian community, fades away into obscurity. With it went the last of those who knew the living Jesus of history, those who stood breath-to-breath with the living Nazarene and delighted in the day of his coming.
I would close this treatise with the knowledge that the Church Jesus proclaimed, has been saved in a most unusual manner. And it will exist again, to last until the coming of the kingdom, just as the Christ has appointed.
|
JESUS AND HELL
