❉✉r❤❛♠ ❊✲❚❤❡s❡s

❚❤❡ ❆s❝❡♥s✐♦♥ ♦❢ ❏❡s✉s ❈❤r✐st✿ ❆ ❈r✐t✐❝❛❧ ❛♥❞

❊①❡❣❡t✐❝❛❧ ❙t✉❞② ♦❢ t❤❡ ❆s❝❡♥s✐♦♥ ✐♥ ▲✉❦❡✲❆❝ts ❛♥❞ ✐♥
t❤❡ ❏❡✇✐s❤ ❛♥❞ ❈❤r✐st✐❛♥ ❈♦♥t❡①ts

▼■❍❖❈✱ ❏❯❙❚■◆✱❆▲❊❳❆◆❉❘❯

❍♦✇ t♦ ❝✐t❡✿

▼■❍❖❈✱ ❏❯❙❚■◆✱❆▲❊❳❆◆❉❘❯ ✭✷✵✶✵✮ ❚❤❡ ❆s❝❡♥s✐♦♥ ♦❢ ❏❡s✉s ❈❤r✐st✿ ❆ ❈r✐t✐❝❛❧ ❛♥❞ ❊①❡❣❡t✐❝❛❧ ❙t✉❞② ♦❢
t❤❡ ❆s❝❡♥s✐♦♥ ✐♥ ▲✉❦❡✲❆❝ts ❛♥❞ ✐♥ t❤❡ ❏❡✇✐s❤ ❛♥❞ ❈❤r✐st✐❛♥ ❈♦♥t❡①ts ✱ ❉✉r❤❛♠ t❤❡s❡s✱ ❉✉r❤❛♠
❯♥✐✈❡rs✐t②✳ ❆✈❛✐❧❛❜❧❡ ❛t ❉✉r❤❛♠ ❊✲❚❤❡s❡s ❖♥❧✐♥❡✿ ❤tt♣✿✴✴❡t❤❡s❡s✳❞✉r✳❛❝✳✉❦✴✻✷✵✴

❯s❡ ♣♦❧✐❝②

❚❤❡ ❢✉❧❧✲t❡①t ♠❛② ❜❡ ✉s❡❞ ❛♥❞✴♦r r❡♣r♦❞✉❝❡❞✱ ❛♥❞ ❣✐✈❡♥ t♦ t❤✐r❞ ♣❛rt✐❡s ✐♥ ❛♥② ❢♦r♠❛t ♦r ♠❡❞✐✉♠✱ ✇✐t❤♦✉t ♣r✐♦r ♣❡r♠✐ss✐♦♥ ♦r
❝❤❛r❣❡✱ ❢♦r ♣❡rs♦♥❛❧ r❡s❡❛r❝❤ ♦r st✉❞②✱ ❡❞✉❝❛t✐♦♥❛❧✱ ♦r ♥♦t✲❢♦r✲♣r♦✜t ♣✉r♣♦s❡s ♣r♦✈✐❞❡❞ t❤❛t✿
• ❛ ❢✉❧❧ ❜✐❜❧✐♦❣r❛♣❤✐❝ r❡❢❡r❡♥❝❡ ✐s ♠❛❞❡ t♦ t❤❡ ♦r✐❣✐♥❛❧ s♦✉r❝❡
• ❛ ❧✐♥❦ ✐s ♠❛❞❡ t♦ t❤❡ ♠❡t❛❞❛t❛ r❡❝♦r❞ ✐♥ ❉✉r❤❛♠ ❊✲❚❤❡s❡s
• t❤❡ ❢✉❧❧✲t❡①t ✐s ♥♦t ❝❤❛♥❣❡❞ ✐♥ ❛♥② ✇❛②
❚❤❡ ❢✉❧❧✲t❡①t ♠✉st ♥♦t ❜❡ s♦❧❞ ✐♥ ❛♥② ❢♦r♠❛t ♦r ♠❡❞✐✉♠ ✇✐t❤♦✉t t❤❡ ❢♦r♠❛❧ ♣❡r♠✐ss✐♦♥ ♦❢ t❤❡ ❝♦♣②r✐❣❤t ❤♦❧❞❡rs✳
P❧❡❛s❡ ❝♦♥s✉❧t t❤❡ ❢✉❧❧ ❉✉r❤❛♠ ❊✲❚❤❡s❡s ♣♦❧✐❝② ❢♦r ❢✉rt❤❡r ❞❡t❛✐❧s✳
❆❝❛❞❡♠✐❝ ❙✉♣♣♦rt ❖✣❝❡✱ ❉✉r❤❛♠ ❯♥✐✈❡rs✐t②✱ ❯♥✐✈❡rs✐t② ❖✣❝❡✱ ❖❧❞ ❊❧✈❡t✱ ❉✉r❤❛♠ ❉❍✶ ✸❍P
❡✲♠❛✐❧✿ ❡✲t❤❡s❡s✳❛❞♠✐♥❅❞✉r✳❛❝✳✉❦ ❚❡❧✿ ✰✹✹ ✵✶✾✶ ✸✸✹ ✻✶✵✼
❤tt♣✿✴✴❡t❤❡s❡s✳❞✉r✳❛❝✳✉❦

✷
 THE ASCENSION OF JESUS CHRIST:

A CRITICAL AND EXEGETICAL STUDY OF THE ASCENSION IN

LUKE-ACTS AND IN THE JEWISH AND CHRISTIAN CONTEXTS

JUSTIN ALEXANDRU MIHOC

MA by Research

Durham University

Department of Theology and Religion

2010
 ABSTRACT

The aim of the present dissertation is to analyse and interpret the Ascension of Jesus as
described in Luke-Acts, and to examine both the Jewish rapture traditions and the early
Christian reception and interpretation of the Lukan accounts. In my research, I tried to
explain how the Ascension event was shaped by Luke and the impact it had within the
Christian Church of the first centuries.

The first chapter tackles the history of research on the Ascension and the proposed
methodology. Following this, the second section of the thesis analyses the Jewish
assumption (rapture) traditions found in both canonical and pseudepigraphal writings.
The common elements between these traditions and the Ascension of Christ are
observed in order to establish a certain dependence of the Ascension narrative on Jewish
rapture accounts.

In the third chapter, I examine the two Ascension accounts in Luke-Acts (Lk 24:50-53;
Acts 1:9-11) and aim to explain the apparent inconsistencies between them. Certain
aspects, such as redundancy and variations, are discussed in detail in the third section of
this chapter.

The fourth chapter focuses on the reception and interpretation of the Lukan Ascension
narratives within the early Christian Church (the pre-Nicene period). Finally, a
summary of the entire thesis and some final remarks are drawn in the conclusion of the
present study.

Two excursuses relevant to this research are included in the appendices: the first on the
Jewish Hekhalot literature and Merkabah mysticism; and the second examining the
Ascension in the Gospels according to Mark (16:19-20 of the ‘longer ending’) and John
(20:17).
 This dissertation is the product of my own work, and the work of others has been
properly acknowledged throughout.

The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. No quotation from it should be
published without the prior written consent and information derived from it should be
acknowledged.

i
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Abbreviations iv

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

1.1 History of Research on Ascension in Luke-Acts 2

1.2 Proposed Methodology and Research Questions 16

Chapter 2: Rapture accounts in the Old Testament and Ancient Judaism 18

2.1 Old Testament (including additional composition in the LXX) 18

2.1.1 Elijah and Elisha in 1-2 Kings 18

2.1.2 Elijah in Sirach 48:9-12 22

2.1.3 Enoch in Genesis 5 23

2.1.4 Psalm 110 (109 LXX) 24

2.2 Jewish Writings from the Hellenistic-Roman Period 26

2.2.1 The Lives of the Prophets 26

2.2.2 Fourth Ezra (Chapters 3-14 of 2 Esdras) 27

2.2.3 The First Book of Enoch 30

2.2.4 The Second Book of Enoch 33

2.2.5 The Book of Jubilees 36

2.2.6 Second Baruch 38

2.2.7 Apocalypse of Zosimus (History of the Rechabites) 40

2.2.8 The Dead Sea Scrolls 41

Chapter 3: The Ascension Narratives in Luke-Acts 45

3.1 The Ascension in the Gospel according to Luke (24:50-53) 45

3.2 The Ascension in the Book of Acts (1:9-11) 60

3.3 Comparison between the Ascension accounts in Luke and Acts 72

Chapter 4: The Reception and Interpretation of the Ascension in

pre-Nicene Christianity 84

4.1 Traditions of the ascension(s) in Christian apocryphal literature 84

4.1.1 Ascension of Old Testament figures 84

ii
 4.1.2 Texts which describe the Ascension of Christ 88

4.2 The Reception of the Ascension in Early Christian Writers 89

4.2.1 The Apostolic Fathers 93

4.2.2 The Ante-Nicene Fathers 97

Chapter 5: Conclusions and Final Remarks 106

Appendices: 110

1. Hekhalot Literature and Merkabah Mysticism 110

2. The Ascension in the Gospels According to Mark and John 113

2.1 The Ascension of Christ in the Gospel of Mark (16:19-20) 113

2.2 The Ascension of Christ in the Gospel of John (20:17) 119

Bibliography 125

iii
 ABBREVIATIONS

LXX The Septuagint

AB Anchor Bible
ABRL Anchor Bible Reference Library
ACCS – NT/OT Ancient Christian Commentary on Scripture – New Testament/Old
Testament
AnBib Analecta Biblica. Investigationes Scientificae in Res Biblicas
ANCL Alexander ROBERTS and James DONALDSON (eds.), Ante-Nicene
Christian Library (24 vols.)
BBET Beiträge zur biblischen Exegese und Theologie
BETL Bibliotheca Ephemeridum theologicarum Lovaniensium
BIS Biblical Interpretation Series
BZNW Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft
und die Kunde der älteren Kirche
CUP Cambridge University Press
EKK Evangelisch-Katholischer Kommentar zum Neuen Testament
Hermeneia Hermeneia. A Critical and Historical Commentary on the Bible
ICC The International Critical Commentary on the Holy Scriptures of
the Old and New Testament
IBMBOR Institutul Biblic şi de Misiune al Bisericii Ortodoxe Române
(Biblical and Mission Institute’s Publishing Office of the Romanian
Orthodox Church)
JBL Journal of Biblical Literature
JSHRZ Jüdische Schriften aus hellenistisch-römischer Zeit
JSJSup Supplements to the Journal for the Study of Judaism
JSNT Journal for the Study of the New Testament
JSNTSup/LNTS Journal for the Study of the New Testament, Supplement
Series/Library of New Testament Studies
JSP Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha
JSPSup Journal for the Study of the Pseudepigrapha, Supplement Series
KEK Kritisch-Exegetischer Kommentar über das Neue Testament
NA27 Nestle-Aland, Novum Testamentum Graece, 27th edition.
NJBC The New Jerome Biblical Commentary
NovT Novum Testamentum
NovTSup Supplements to Novum Testamentum
NPNF Philip Schaff’s Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers (2 series: 28 vols.)
NRSV Holy Bible: New Revised Standard Version
NTS New Testament Studies
OTP Charlesworth’s Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (2 vols.)
OUP Oxford University Press

iv
SAP Sheffield Academic Press
SBLDS Society of Biblical Literature – Dissertation Seri
SBLMS Society of Biblical Literature – Monograph Series
SBLSS Society of Biblical Literature – Semeia Studies
SNTS MS Studiorum Novi Testamenti Societas – Monograph Series
SP Sacra Pagina Series
SVS St Vladimir’s Seminary
TynNTC Tyndale New Testament Commentaries
VetT Vetus Testamentum
WBC Word Biblical Commentary
WUNT Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament
ZNW Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde
der Älteren Kirche

v
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

The Ascension of Christ to Heaven can be said to be one of the most notable and
influential events within Christian doctrine. It represents both an ending (that of Christ’s
earthly presence) and a beginning (the beginning of the Apostles’ ministry). The
synthesis of my argument is that of the compatibility or incompatibility of canonical
literature (the initial meaning of the text) and its integration within Church tradition.

Luke, the ‘beloved physician’ and evangelist, 1 is the only New Testament writer to
record a visible Ascension of Christ. 2 He presents the Ascension event twice (Luke
24:50-52 and Acts 1:9-11), as the culmination and climax of his gospel and as the
element of the beginning in the introduction of his second volume, Acts of the Apostles.
The Ascension was pre-signified by prophecies of the Old Testament and the tradition
of rapture stories. 3

In this introduction I shall present a history of the research on the Ascension in Luke
and Acts, with a special emphasis on the development of doctrine and interpretation of
the Lukan texts in the last century. The previous studies will be reviewed both in
thematic (topic-related) and chronological order, beginning with German scholarship.
Also, the proposed methodology and research questions will be introduced in the second
part of the present chapter.

1
On the authorship of Luke-Acts it is argued that the two-volume book might be an edited version of
some material preserved from Luke by an anonymous Christian writer towards the end of the first
century. ‘It is possible that Luke, Paul’s companion, is the source for the “we” passages in Acts and
perhaps for more of the material in Acts 13-28. This Luke would be a second generation Christian. (Paul
must be considered a first generation Christian.) Towards the end of the first century a third generation
Christian – who had not accompanied Paul – using Luke as his authority for the latter half of Acts
composed Luke-Acts.’ STERLING 1992: 326. However, the majority of biblical scholars recognise Luke, a
Syrian of Antioch, as the author of Luke-Acts. ‘One should accept the tradition that Luke composed this
Gospel [and, subsequently, Acts], for there seems no reason why anyone in the ancient church would
invent this datum and make a relatively obscure figure the author of a Gospel.’ KARRIS 1995 (NJBC
43:2): 648. Therefore, when referring to the designation of author of Luke-Acts, I will always use Luke.
2
MARSHALL 1978: 908.
3
Old Testament figures were supposed to be taken up to heaven without dying. Some of the most
important are: Enoch, Elijah, Moses, Ezra and Baruch.
1
1.1 History of Research on Ascension in Luke-Acts

A complete presentation of the research on the Gospel of Luke and Acts of the Apostles
in the modern period was compiled by François Bovon, in his volume entitled Luke the
Theologian: Fifty-five Years of Research (1950-2005) 4, containing both a thematic
evaluation and a comprehensive bibliography and indexes. Moreover, an overview of
the ascension account in Luke and Acts was produced by A.W. Zwiep in his doctoral
dissertation presented at Durham University under the supervision of Prof. Dr. J.D.G.
Dunn in 1996, and published a year later. 5

Before this exhaustive presentation of the Lukan ascension narratives some endeavours
were made, both in doctrinal and text-critical directions. One of the first modern
approaches to the Ascension was that of D.F. Strauß 6, who argued against a physical
elevation of Jesus and regarded it as a ‘myth’. He refused the rationalist view, which he
considered in conflict with the meaning of the text, and stressed that the Ascension was
never meant to be taken ad literam. 7 The myth-hypothesis presented by Strauß was later
developed by Adolf von Harnack. 8 He affirmed that in the preaching of the early church
the Ascension was linked to resurrection-exaltation, and thus Luke resorted to a
primitive tradition when composing his works. Later on, Eduard Meyer 9 tried to
recreate the historical context of the Ascension tradition and concluded that Acts 1:2-14
represented a second-century interpolation. 10 Other scholars argued that a Gnostic
interpolation in Acts is not viable, and suggested that the two accounts agree in terms of
the information presented. 11

Beginning with the publication of Victorien C. Larrañaga’s voluminous dissertation, 12

the study of Ascension developed into a serious enterprise. He responded to Harnack’s
and Meyer’s theories by trying to establish the original text of the Ascension accounts,
based on manuscripts and early patristic evidence. Larrañaga’s conclusion was that the

4
2nd revised ed., 2006.
5
The Ascension of the Messiah in Lukan Christology, 1997.
6
STRAUß 1840: 642-662.
7
Cited by ZWIEP 1997: 1-3.
8
HARNACK 1908: 126-127: ‘Dagegen ist die leibliche Himmelfahrt ohne Zweifel eine Erzählung, die sich
im Kreise der Elfe gebildet haben kann.’
9
MEYER 1921: 34-46.
10
MEYER 1921: 36.
11
Cf. ZWIEP 1997: 6-7.
12
L’Ascension de Notre-Seigneur dans la Nouveau Testament, 1938.
2
Alexandrian text-type (oriental recension) represented the most accurate version of the
texts (Lk 24:50-53 and Acts 1:2, 9). In his opinion, both passages describe the same
event and do not reflect a legendary evolution. The most important contribution to the
ascension subject, since the work of Larrañaga, was for a long time the extensive article
of Pierre Benoit 13. In his article he reached the conclusions that the tradition of the forty
days was established only in the fourth century 14, that the elevation was corporal
because a physical resurrection implies a physical ascension as well, and that the
Ascension episode represented the Messiah’s last appearance which took place
simultaneously with the resurrection and exaltation, tradition attested since the primitive
church. 15 Luke may have received the information about the appearances during a forty
day period after writing his first volume. 16 Alfred Plummer, in his commentary on
Luke’s Gospel, suggests that Luke’s intention was to reserve the Ascension narrative for
Acts, but at least a final departure is meant in Luke 24:50-53. The mark of Luke’s style
continues to the end and, by this, the idea of a later interpolation is excluded. 17
Although Larrañaga and Benoit are considered two of the most influential writers on the
Ascension studies, the majority of scholars do not accept the physical-elevation idea, an
important author on the demythologisation of the Ascension story being Rudolf
Bultmann. 18 It can be easily observed that the scholarship on the subject has been
dominated for a long period by German authors. Apart from Larrañaga and Benoit,
Henry Barclay Swete was the only non-German scholar to write two books related to
the subject: one on the appearances of Christ after the Resurrection 19 and another one on
the Ascension 20.

Swete thinks that Jerusalem was the destined scene of the beginnings of the Church’s
life and work, and that ‘it was in the neighbourhood of Jerusalem that the last events of

13
‘L’Ascension’, 1949: 161-203.
14
‘It was only from the 4th century that the tradition of an Ascension after forty days became established
in the Church beyond dispute.’ BENOIT 1973: 220 n. 6; cf. LARRAÑAGA 1938: 570-601.
15
Cf. BOVON 2006: 191-192.
16
The same idea is shared by PLUMMER 1901: 564-571. According to Plummer, Luke probably did not
know the exact amount of time between the Resurrection and the Ascension, but he gained this
information between the publication of the Gospel and of the Acts of the Apostles.
17
PLUMMER 1901: 565.
18
BULTMANN 1941, cited by ZWIEP 1997: 11. He stressed that the ascension account is a popular legend,
as a consequence of the materialization of the Easter appearances. Cf. BOVON 2006: 192.
19
SWETE 1908.
20
SWETE 1911.
3
the forty days must take place’ 21. He supposes that the Luke 24:44-47 narrative took
place the Sunday before the Ascension and the rest of the gospel’s text refers to the day
of Ascension. 22 The last appearance of Jesus before his Ascension began with the
eleven in Jerusalem, probably in the upper room of the house, but ended on the Mount
of Olives, somewhere in the direction of Bethany (today: el ‘Azaryeh). The
commentator criticises the traditional site of the Ascension 23 suggesting that the
position of the summit was too near to Jerusalem and in full view of the city. 24 Thinking
of the Ascension as a physical translation from earth, through the atmosphere, into
heaven is a misreading of the historical fact, and a misapprehension of the inner truth
which it represents. The author’s interpretation of the Ascension scene is that ‘it is a
fact, as we believe, that forty days more or less after the Resurrection the Lord finally
withdrew His risen body from the eyes and touch of His disciples, and that in the
moment of His disappearance He was enveloped by a passing cloud, which travelled
upwards as if it were carrying Him up to heaven. And this fact was the symbol of a
great and vital Christian truth, which is also a fact, but in a spiritual world.’ 25 Swete
thinks that the Ascension represents the end of the appearances after the Resurrection
and that it was a spiritual elevation from this physical world. The exalted life of the
Lord has the purpose of direct action upon the living Church. By being ‘at the right
hand of God’ he is paradoxically in our midst, and the Ascension implies a return in the
same way as the withdrawal (reappearance). 26

One of the most important British critical studies on the Ascension was that by J.G.
Davies, in 1958. Through a careful historical study of the importance of the doctrine for
the early Church, and through a systematic attempt to state its importance for the
twentieth-century Christian, Davies tries to demonstrate that the Ascension episode was

21
SWETE 1908: 92.
22
SWETE 1908: 97.
23
According to the pilgrim Egeria (Etheria), the traditional place of Christ’s Ascension was the summit of
the Mount of Olives and, more precisely, where Imbomon church was built to commemorate the great
event and to mark the Ascension site. ‘And from here [the chuch of Eleona], around the sixth hour of the
night, everyone goes up to the Imbomon, singing hymns. That is the place from which the Lord ascended
into heaven.’ Itinerarium Egeriae 35, in GINGARAS 1970: 108. Cf. also Itinerarium Egeriae 31; 43; 49.
24
‘We must think rather of some place on or near the Bethany road, about half way between Bethany and
Jerusalem, sufficiently remote from both and yet within sight of the former at least.’ SWETE 1908:103.
25
SWETE 1908: 105.
26
SWETE 1908: 108-109.
4
a part of the primitive kerygma, and unquestioned in the early Church. 27 He begins by
presenting the prophecies of the Ascension in the Old Testament, linking them to
Luke’s accounts on the elevation of Christ. He stresses that the Ascension occurred on
the same day as the resurrection 28 and that it represented the climax of the redemptive
act of God. 29

In the period of Redaktionsgeschichte, the studies of Hans Conzelmann (on Luke) 30 and
Ernst Haenchen (Acts) 31 focused on the selection and the process of organising the
materials that formed the basis of Luke’s two-book opus. According to Conzelmann, the
resurrection appearances and the later appearances are different, in the way that the
second ones do not occur from Heaven (the appearances within the forty days). 32 The
Ascension is seen as having a twofold meaning: as an act of exaltation (Jesus is at the
right hand of the Father and his appearances are now from Heaven) and as a parallel to
the Parousia. Conzelmann stresses that Luke ‘used tradition to express his own
conception’ 33. There is a further period of time until the Pentecost is introduced by Luke
at the end of his gospel, and therefore, ‘the Ascension does not form the conclusion of
the first, but the beginning of the second volume of Luke’s historical account’ (p.
204) 34. In the author’s opinion, the Ascension marks the limit of Jesus’ stay on earth
and the beginning of his heavenly reign. 35 Haenchen demonstrated that, in comparison
with later apocryphal ascension stories, the text of Luke avoids legendary details and

27
In his mention on the work of Davies, Parsons appreciated that only ‘a few studies, like J.G. Davies’ He
Ascended into Heaven, have attempted to deal with all the New Testament references to the ascension as
well as the creedal and patristic evidence in a comprehensive history of doctrine. Davies’ systematic
analysis, though a helpful historical survey, was not sensitive to the distinction between references to the
ascension which attempt to describe Christ’s exaltation and narratives of the ascension which attempt to
describe the events itself.’ PARSONS 1987: 14.
28
ZWIEP 1997: 12.
29
Davies 1958: 171.
30
CONZELMANN 1961: 202-206.
31
HAENCHEN 1956; cf. HAENCHEN 1963: 155–187.
32
‘Such appearances presuppose the Ascension and are of a different kind, for they establish no
relationship with the Lord in the special sense that the Resurrection appearances do.’ CONZELMANN 1961:
203-204.
33
CONZELMANN 1961: 204.
34
‘More precisely, Conzelmann marked the period of post-Easter appearances up to the ascension as
“eine heilige Zeit zwischen den Zeiten” and the period between ascension and Pentecost as “ein geistloser
Zwischenraum”.’ ZWIEP 1997: 13.
35
‘The next event after the Ascension in the series of mighty acts no longer affects the course of events in
Jesus’ life, and the Church only secondarily, but it affects the Church directly the outpouring of the
Spirit.’ CONZELMANN 1961: 206.
5
personal impressions, and that Luke’s aim was not to give a spectacular account of the
Ascension, but only to present the historical event. 36

P.A. Stempvoort argued that the two Ascension accounts (Luke 24 and Acts 1) are in
fact two complementary interpretations of the same story: ‘In comparing these two
interpretations, we hold that they are a twofold interpretation of the same events of the
Christophanies, one interpretation not excluding the other, one filling the gaps in the
other.’ 37 Furthermore, C.H. Talbert considered that there may be two distinct traditions
behind the Lukan Ascension narratives. Nevertheless, he demonstrated that both the
style and architecture of the passages belong to Luke’s literary creation. 38 G. Haufe 39
argued upon the idea that a pre-Lukan ascension tradition may be found in the Jewish
Entrückung narratives. Zwiep, discussing Haufe’s hypothesis, said that ‘on the basis of
the rapture-preservation pattern in the Jewish rapture stories of Enoch, Elijah, Moses,
Baruch and Ezra, he [i.e. Haufe] concluded that only those historical figures which were
physically taken up to God could exercise an eschatological role. 40

Gottfried Schille and Rudolf Pesch maintained the idea of a pre-Lukan origin of the
composition, and attempted to uncover an early-tradition stratum of the Ascension
story. Schille 41 identified some elements that betray a liturgical concern, belonging to
the feast of the Ascension in the Jerusalem Church, and argued that Acts 1:9-11 may
have been taken out of a larger narrative unit. His thesis was criticised by S.G. Wilson,
who considered Luke more than a mere editor of a previous tradition, and that he must
be recognised as an author and theologian. 42 Following Schille and Haenchen, Pesch
thought that Luke’s accounts are inspired by the Elijah traditions, thus various pre-
Lukan sources 43, and even tried to reconstruct the original source composition. 44 Lately,

36
ZWIEP 1997: 14.
37
STEMPVOORT 1958-1959: 42.
38
TALBERT 1974: 61.
39
HAUFE 1961: 105-113.
40
ZWIEP 1997: 17.
41
SCHILLE 1966: 183–199.
42
‘There is no good reason to suppose that Acts 1:9-11 is a unit of pre-Lukan tradition whose original Sitz
im Leben was the worship of the early Jerusalem Christians. Much of the evidence points to a Lukan
origin, and certainly none of it is irreconcilable with his view.’ WILSON 1968: 274.
43
‘Lukas hat die ihm vorgegebene Tradition von der Entrückung Jesu bewusst aufgegriffen und
ausgestaltet, da sie ihm erlaubte, das Kerygma von der Erhöhung Jesu von dem seiner Auferweckung zu
unterscheiden und an das Augenzeugnis der Apostel zu binden.’ PESCH 1986: 74.
44
The reconstructed passage in Greek can be found in ZWIEP 1997: 20.
6
the originality of the Ascension accounts in Luke-Acts was defended by Charles G.
Kosanke in his doctoral dissertation. 45

A more comprehensive study of the Ascension, which analyses both the Lukan text and
their parallels, is the doctoral thesis of Gerhard Lohfink (1971). His purpose was to
explore the history of the ascension tradition and to determine that this tradition
developed out of the exaltation kerygma. Lohfink makes a distinction, based on Greco-
Roman, Jewish and Old Testament texts, between two forms of ascension: the heavenly
journey or sometimes vision (Himmelsreise) of the soul and the actual translation or
rapture (Entrückung). 46 The second is characterised by elevation (not only the soul is
taken up), the disappearance of the ascendant one, and its occurrence at the end of the
person’s earthly life. 47 Lohfink demonstrates that both of Luke’s narratives are his own
composition based on earlier traditions and, thus, that both belong to the rapture type
(form-critically). 48 Through redaction-critical analysis the hypothesis that two different
traditions stood behind the Lukan composition was rejected, the two accounts both
being the result of Luke’s composition technique. In his conclusion, Lohfink states that
Luke’s Ascension narratives do not describe a historical event in time and space, and
assigns the entire report to a literary activity. 49 Lohfink’s ideas on the Ascension
strongly influenced Richard Dillon, who shares the same view in his dissertation on
Luke 24. 50 In Dillon’s outlook, the Ascension is a central point of Luke’s works, being

45
‘Our survey on the Ascension tradition in the NT has found no evidence for a pre-Lukan tradition
containing an Ascension account such as we find in Luke-Acts. (The references in Mk. 16:19 and Jn.
20:17 are later than Luke-Acts.)’ KOSANKE 1993: 79.
46
Cf. LOHFINK 1971: 32-42.
47
‘Unlike the heavenly journeys and assumptions of the soul, a rapture is concerned with a physical
taking up of a human being into Paradise of heaven as the final conclusion of his earthly life (Enoch,
Elijah, Ezra and Baruch). The ascent after an appearance of a heavenly being (an angel, the angel of
YHWH or YHWH himself) is in fact a return to heaven.’ ZWIEP 1997: 22.
48
‘Da sich die beiden lukanischen Texte ausgezeichnet in dieses Grundschema einfügen, müssen sie als
Entrükungserzälungen klassifiziert werden. Die Himmelfahrt Jesu wird also von Lukas als Entrükung
dargestellt und zu Wort gebracht.‘ LOHFINK 1971: 242.
49
‘A last section deals with the question of the historicity of the ascension. Lohfink finds an answer in the
distinction between historical and real. Just like the resurrection, the ascension-elevation is a real
phenomenon, but it escapes historical investigation. Luke has historicised an event in the style of OT
writers. This support gives warrant to and legitimizes his undertaking.’ BOVON 2006: 198; DONNE, in his
theological study on the Ascension, considers that if the historicity of the resurrection is vouched for by
the appearance of the risen Christ, then the Ascension must also have a place in history to indicate that he
would no longer appear in that way until the Parousia. DONNE 1983: 22-25.
50
‘While many have been won over to the view that, as an event distinct from the resurrection and
terminus of the christophanies, the ascension originated in the thought of St. Luke, we should rather keep
an open mind towards the possibility, urged by others, that Luke was not the first to recount this terminal
7
placed in the gospel’s finale and in the opening of Acts. He observed a phenomenon of
‘compression’ in Luke’s gospel narration; ‘Luke is not primarily interested in the
external time-framework of the paschal Easter occurrence, but in their inner unity and
totality. It is the complete Easter occurrence, the sum of its several components,
scripturally ordained and editorially condensed “on the third day” that he expounds in
the schema of a single day’s course.’ 51 For Luke, it is essential not to narrate a
chronological fact, but to express the truth. The endpoint of the gospel represents the
episode of the Ascension together with the Resurrection, and this was the interest of the
author in the narrative corpus.

François Bovon objected to Lohfink’s (and, respectively, Dillon’s) ideas that challenge
the legitimacy of the need to distinguish the visible ascension from rapture (or
assumption of the soul/vision). ‘Is it necessary at this point to distinguish between the
ascension (visible) and the elevation (invisible) and, consequently, isolate Luke from
the rest of the NT? Are not John and Hebrews, by insisting on the elevation, closer to
Luke than Lohfink is willing to admit?’ 52 John F. Maile argues that both Luke 24 and
Acts 1 represent the conclusion of the resurrection appearances. Maile (as well as
Lohfink) thinks that the number of forty days represents a biblical number: ‘The number
corresponds to Luke’s use of Jerusalem as a geographical pointer, both geography and
chronology being employed to join together the time of Jesus and the time of the
Church.’ 53 He sees the Ascension as the culmination of the appearances and the
confirmation of the exaltation. In Maile’s view, this episode is also the prelude to the
Pentecost (the sending of the Spirit) and the pledge of the return of Christ. 54

Mikeal C. Parsons’ study on the Ascension 55 examined in detail, through various

methods of historical criticism (textual, form, source, redaction) and ‘narrative
analysis’, how the two narratives function. He defended the priority of the Western text

episode, hence that either his gospel ending, or the Acts account, or both, rest upon tradition he received.’
DILLON 1978: 174-175.
51
DILLON 1978: 181.
52
BOVON 2006: 198. He rejects any redaction hypothesis in the case of Acts 1; however, BOVON felt that
LOHFINK’s arguments were more convincing for Luke 24. The same view is shared by PARSONS 1987:
62-63.
53
MAILE 1986: 52.
54
‘For Luke the ascension is not just the confirmation of a present reality but also the certain pledge of a
future consummation.’ MAILE 1986: 58.
55
The Departure of Jesus in Luke-Acts (1987) represents an extensive revision of his doctoral
dissertation.
8
(or Western non-interpolations) in Luke 24, 56 opting for the shorter version which has
no mention of the Ascension. 57 The original version, he concludes, mentioned Jesus'
departure but not specifically his ascension. 58 Furthermore, he analysed Acts 1:1-11 as
an introduction to the story and offered arguments for a possible rapture tradition behind
the Lukan text. 59 Parsons concluded by saying that ‘the similarities and differences
between the two narratives are best explained not in terms of interpolation or sources
theories, but in terms of their literary function.’ 60

In the quest of identifying the genre of Acts, Richard I. Pervo remains suspicious about
the historicity of Acts and disregards the idea that Luke was a historian. His central
concern became the ‘enigma thus produced: a Luke who was a bumbling and
incompetent as a historian yet brilliant and creative as an author.’ 61 He acknowledges
that the prefaces and speeches in Acts are consistent with ancient historiography, but
stresses that their presence alone is insufficient to establish the genre of Acts as
historiography. 62 On the other hand, David E. Aune 63 suggests that Luke may be
considered the creator of a new genre of Church History. Following Haenchen 64, he
suggests that ‘Luke, rather than Eusebius (of Caesarea), should be credited with creating
the new genre of church history. His achievement is remarkable in view of the early date
of his work (ca. A.D. 90) and the long period that elapsed before he found an imitator

56
The consensus regarding the longer non-Western text was also challenged by M.-É. BOISMARD and A.
LAMOUILLE; cited by ZWIEP 1996: 220-221. ‘For the sake of fairness it must be borne in mind that their
[i.e. of BOISMARD and LAMOUILLE] conclusions form a part of a larger theory on the composition of
Luke-Acts as a whole.’ ZWIEP 1997: 32.
57
‘It may seem best to regard the non-interpolations in Luke 24:51-52 as doubtful and to account them as
efforts to enhance and elevate Lukan Christology, as Parsons has suggested. Otherwise we have little
recourse but to agree with Fitzmeyer, who says, Why Luke has dated the ascension of Jesus in these two
different ways no one will ever know.’ TYSON 2006: 108.
58
In the most recent study on Codex Bezae, Joseph RIUS-CAMPS and Jenny READ-HEIMERDINGER defend
the shorter ending of Luke’s gospel. RIUS-CAMPS; READ-HEIMERDINGER 2004: 88-89.
59
However, PARSONS is less certain than LOHFINK that Luke used a certain tradition, but he accepts the
idea of redaction of a primitive ascension story into a farewell scene. ‘In Acts, Luke expanded the
ascension narrative by means of apocalyptic stage-props so that the departure of Jesus in his sequel
volume provides the impetus for the gift of the Spirit and the mission of the church.’ PARSONS 1987: 150.
60
ZWIEP 1997: 31.
61
PERVO 1987: 3.
62
PHILLIPS (2006: 369-370) stresses that ‘for Pervo, many of the literary themes (e.g. persecution,
conspiracies, riots and travels) and literary devices (e.g. wit and irony) in Acts would have entertained
ancient readers and encouraged them to read Acts as something other than historiography.’ In his opinion,
Acts is seen as a novel because it was popular (as opposed to historical writings) and maintained a deeper
interest in entertaining its readers than did the learned historiography of the time.
63
1988.
64
HAENCHEN 1966: 258-278.
9
and continuator in Eusebius.’ 65 This idea is shared also by Daniel Marguerat who argues
that the genre of Luke’s writings can be that of an apologetic history. 66

In the discussion on Luke’s purpose of writing his works, Stephen J. Binz demonstrated
that in his gospel the author prepares Jesus’ exodus (9:31) which ends with the
Ascension. The journey to the Father begins in Jerusalem (9:51) and ends near
Jerusalem. The purpose of the Ascension narrative in the gospel is to show the
glorification of Jesus, whereas in Acts it represents the prelude for a new era (of the
Church). 67 H. Douglas Buckwalter stresses that Luke’s purpose of focusing on Jesus’
baptism and Ascension was ‘both to fend off a Gnostic move to separate spirit and flesh
in Jesus and to endorse the church’s belief in the full humanity of Jesus’. 68

Christopher Francis Evans defended the unity of Luke-Acts suggesting that it was a
two-volume work separated into two separate books for inclusion into different parts of
the New Testament Canon. Furthermore, he implies that the ending of the gospel and
the beginning of the Acts are later interpolations because of this reason. 69 Luke Timothy
Johnson, however, does not agree with the assumption that because of some
manuscripts’ omission of the phrase carried up into heaven (Luke 24:51) and because it

65
AUNE 1988: 139. In AUNE’s view, the literary model and source for Luke was the Gospel of Mark,
which he modified. ‘He framed Mark with large blocks of narrative material. He wrote Mark in a more
elevated literary style. Following the Hellenistic convention of using one source at a time, he intercalated
a large section of Jesus’ teachings from another source (Q) into the middle of Mark (9:51-18:14). The
many parallels between Luke and Acts reveal the author’s intention to provide the kind of literary unity
for his second book that he had achieved in his first. Mark was a direct model for Luke’s first book, and
an indirect model for his second.’ (p. 139)
66
‘A rejection of a political apology does not lead us to ignore the indisputable apologetic intentions that
are found throughout the book of Acts.’ MARGUERAT 2002: 29. In this respect he follows STERLING who
writes: ‘Did apologetic historiography play a decisive role in the writing of Luke-Acts? I believe it did.
The author shared the same outlook as the writers of this genre: they belonged to subgroups within the
larger Greco-Roman world. It was this consciousness which led them to write the story of their group
(Content). Common to all of the works is the emphasis on the antiquity of the group;’ and concludes by
saying that ‘the creative transformation of apologetic historiography laid the basis for subsequent
Christian historiography.’ STERLING 1992: 386-387, 389.
67
‘In the Gospel, the ascension occurs on the same day as the resurrection, whereas in Acts 1:9-11, it took
place forty days later. The essential affirmation of both accounts is that Jesus is with the Father in glory.’
BINZ 1989: 98.
68
BUCKWALTER 1996: 8.
69
‘Verses 50-53 are transitional, and end somewhat lamely as the conclusion of the book.’ EVANS 1990:
297.
10
seems to duplicate the Ascension scene in Acts, the phrase represents a later
interpolation. 70

Recently two scholars (Pervo and Parsons) questioned the assumed idea of the unity
between Luke and Acts, with arguments such as the differences in genre, narrative and
theology. 71 Based on the reception-history argument, Andrew Gregory 72 argues upon
the Luke-Acts unity hypothesis through analysing the way in which Irenaeus and the
Muratorian Fragment link the ending of the gospel to the beginning of Acts. 73 The idea
of unity is also shared by Patricia Walters, who investigates both the internal and
external evidence in support for the unity. 74 Markus Bockmuehl 75 agrees with the
reception-history approach, affirming that this provides a range of plausible meanings
for the original intention of the text. However, C. Kavin Rowe 76 contests the
conclusions of Gregory on the basis that both Irenaeus and the Muratorian Fragment
only claim a common authorship for Luke-Acts. 77 ‘It is important to note that, in
contrast to Parsons and Pervo, neither Gregory nor Rowe nor Bockmuehl denies a
literary unity between Luke and Acts.’ 78

By far the most significant treatment of the Ascension is that of A.W. Zwiep’s
monograph (The Ascension of The Messiah in Lukan Christology). He systematically
examines the ascension traditions in Luke and Acts, establishing the context of their
understanding within early Christian thought. Following Lohfink, he classifies the two
accounts (Luke 24 and Acts 1) as rapture stories 79, comparing Jesus’ Ascension with

70
‘In the preface of his second volume (Acts 1:2), Luke refers to Jesus ‘having been taken up’
(analēmphthē) even though he has not yet recounted the scene of Acts 1:9-11, so he was aware of his own
earlier account.’ JOHNSON 1991: 404.
71
PARSONS; PERVO 1993.
72
GREGORY 2003: 38-45.
73
‘I found no external evidence to suggest that these two texts ever circulated together as a two-volume
book, but did not conclude (as does Rowe) that this need call into question contemporary assumptions
about the unity of Luke-Acts.’ GREGORY 2007: 460.
74
WALTERS 2008.
75
BOCKMUEHL 2005: 163-166.
76
ROWE 2005: 131-157.
77
Most recently, Rowe declared: ‘The point of my earlier article (i.e. 2005) was not to object to the
historical-critical method as such but rather to note the way in which the reception history of Luke and
Acts in particular creates hermeneutical problems for the assumptions that undergird standard scholarly
practice.’ ROWE 2007: 456.
78
BIRD 2007: 438.
79
He defines the notion of rapture (Entrückung) as ‘a bodily translation into the beyond as the conclusion
of one’s earthly life without the intervention of death’. ZWIEP 2001: 331.
11
the assumption of Jewish figures: 80 ‘Whereas in the original Enoch and Elijah stories
their rapture was in itself a crown to their career, later their rapture was seen as a
precursory event which set them temporarily aside as it were for a future task in the
eschaton... It seems then that the Jewish rapture-preservation scheme provides a very
plausible context of comparison and horizon of understanding for a sachgemässe
understanding of the Ascension of Jesus.’ 81 Zwiep analyses Lukan Christology
according to the resurrection-exaltation-ascension spectrum. 82 In his opinion, Luke
assumes the primitive kerygma conjoining bodily resurrection with heavenly exaltation
in one historical moment. 83 Luke is regarded both as an ‘outstanding historian’ and a
‘good storyteller’, and as a ‘committed theologian and evangelist’. In Zwiep’s view, the
major purpose of Luke’s rapture Christology is to deal with the eschatological problem
of the Parousia. Zwiep concludes that the Lukan Ascension story originated in the early
tradition of Christian thought. 84

A further and more recent study on the Ascension in Acts is the published doctoral
thesis of Matthew Sleeman. Through a spatial interpretation (geographical theory) of the
Ascension, he examines Acts 1:1-11:18, with special emphasis on the role of geography
in constructing and communicating the theological message. His innovative approach is
meant to fill particular gaps within Ascension scholarship. Beginning with a history of
the research, the first part of the survey deals with a comparative examination of the
Ascension, ‘a narrative appreciation of Acts and the inherent production of space within
a narrative.’ 85 Following Edward Soja’s understanding of time and space 86, Sleeman

80
He concludes that ‘with the list of Enoch, Elijah, Moses, Ezra, Baruch and Phinehas (and perhaps
Melchizedek) the Jewish rapture list seems to be exhausted’. ZWIEP 1997: 77.
81
ZWIEP 1997: 78-79.
82
‘Lohfink and others have argued that Luke’s ascension stories really are the narrative expression of an
idea that is in other texts connected more directly with Jesus’ resurrection, that is his exaltation. Zwiep, in
reaction to this, argues that according to the Jewish paradigm, the end result is not an act of enthronement
or apotheosis, but preservation to fulfil some task in the end of time.’ SMITH 2006: 87.
83
‘Whatever one may say about traditions and sources of the ascension narratives, the way Luke has
positioned the ascension texts at the key point of his two-volume work (at the centre and the close of the
first, in the opening chapter of the second book) suggests that the ascension of Jesus is of central
significance to Luke... In structuring the narrative symmetrically, Luke has effected a unified
composition.’ ZWIEP 1997: 115.
84
‘The constituent parts of Luke’s rapture Christology (the post-resurrection appearances, the biblical
number of 40, the fact that the period of appearances had come to a close, the conviction of Jesus’ future
return on the clouds of heaven) all have a firm basis in the Christian tradition prior to Luke.’ ZWIEP 1997:
198.
85
SLEEMAN 2009: 57.
12
distinguishes a three-part schema of space, and sets the premises for a reading of Acts. 87
In the second part, he applies the selected methodology (‘thirdspace analysis’) to the
biblical text, determining how space is organised and structured within Acts. The
Ascension cloud is seen as an obvious separation between earth (first- and secondspace)
and heaven (thirdspace). 88 He concludes by saying that his study ‘has advanced
understanding of the Ascension in Acts, its place within the narrative, and the role of
geography in exegeting it. It has shown that Jesus’ Ascension in Acts not only happens
within the narrative, it also structures it’. 89

From the area of doctrinal studies, two recent works on Ascension are worth
mentioning. Douglas Farrow offers a substantial survey of the doctrine of the Ascension
in its cosmological, ecclesiological and liturgical context. He defended the historical
event of Christ’s bodily Ascension by examining the development of Christian doctrine
from the New Testament to the present day. ‘The Ascension (not the resurrection or the
Parousia) thus becomes the climax of Jesus-history and the eschatological event,
fulfilling all prophetic hopes of Israel. And this eschatologizes what is left of history by
setting it within the tension of his departure and still-impending return.’ 90 The second
study is the one by Geritt Scott Dawson, who offers an excellent example of
confessional theology, focusing on the implication of the belief that the incarnate Jesus
physically ascended into heaven. Following Farrow, Dawson analyses in the three part

86
Human geographer Edward W. SOJA defines ‘historicism as an overdeveloped historical
contextualisation of social life and social theory that actively submerges and peripheralizes the
geographical of spatial imagination’ (1989: 15). In Soja’s thought, Thirdspace ‘is another way of thinking
about the social production of human spatiality that incorporates both Firstspace and Secondspace
perspectives while at the same time opening up the scope and complexity of the geographical or spatial
imagination’ (2000: 11). His main work on thirdspatiality remains Thirdspace. Journeys to Los Angeles
and Other Real-And-Imagined Places (1996), in which he defines the terminology used and explores the
different space critiques. On a further discussion on the meaning of space, see: SACK 1980: 4-9.
87
‘Firstspace refers to external, material physical spatiality, to the privileging of objectivity, to the
concrete and mappable geographies of our lifeworlds... Soja also identifies secondspace, that is mental
projections into the empirical world from conceived or imagined geographies... A thirdspace perspective
opens up renewed ways of thinking about space, seeking to break out from the constraining Big
Dichotomy by introducing an-Other.’ SLEEMAN 2009: 44. For a further discussion on the ‘third space
theology’ see: BAKER 2007: 137-154.
88
SLEEMAN 2009: 77-78: ‘Importantly, despite the fourfold proclamation of Christ’s new location [i.e.
heaven, in Acts 1:9], the watching disciples are kept by the cloud from seeing the ascended Jesus; a clear
demarcation between earth and heaven remains. This preserves ascension thirdspace so sovereignly
independent of mortal control throughout Acts, an important buffer against reducing the heavenly Christ
to merely firstspatial or secondspatial categories.’
89
SLEEMAN 2009: 236.
90
FARROW 1999: 17.
13
survey the centrality of the Ascension within the Church and her theology: ‘The
ascension rightly, bodily taught and preached calls us to a magnificent hope. Jesus holds
title to our humanity as a pledge of future restoration.’ 91

On the ascension motif and rapture traditions in Jewish and Christian Literature, three
studies are of great interest for our survey. Mary Dean-Otting 92 analyses the heavenly
ascensions in the Jewish non-canonical texts, and differentiates the heavenly journey
motif within the Hellenistic-Jewish literature from the other ancient literature ascension
accounts. 93 Martha Himmelfarb examines the background of the ascent apocalypses and
affirms that Ezekiel influenced the Enoch ascent narrative in the Book of Watchers 94,
which itself influenced the later ascent literature. The recent book by Adela Yarbro
Collins 95 represents a collection of studies on Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic
literature. In this monograph the author examines cosmological motifs 96 in some ancient
textual accounts (such as The Book of Watchers, The Testament of Levi, The Life of
Adam and Eve, 2 Enoch and 3 Baruch) and links their common tradition to New
Testament eschatology. On the significance of the apocalypses, Collins concludes by
stating that ‘the two main emphases of the apocalypses, social-religious critique and
mystical experience, were mutually supportive in their original context. Any retrieval of
these texts should take into account, not only their aesthetic and traditionally religious
qualities, but also their latent transformative power.’ 97

On the reception of Luke-Acts within the early Christian thought and the discussion of
the theory of the theological interpretation of Scripture 98 I shall begin by mentioning the
International East-West Symposium of New Testament Scholars, a project of the

91
DAWSON 2004: 210.
92
DEAN-OTTING 1984.
93
Reviewing this monograph, Paula GOODER notes that ‘while it is true that Dean-Otting’s work largely
consists of presenting the content of many texts of ascent, its value lies in drawing out their major motifs
and common characteristics rather than imposing a predetermined structure onto those texts.’ GOODER
2006: 27.
94
‘Although ascent is a new development, the debt of 1 Enoch 14 to Ezekiel is profound... The line of
descent is made clear by the wheels of the throne, which appear only in Ezekiel among biblical works and
which no longer have a function in Enoch’s ascent, where the throne sits fixed in heaven.’ HIMMELFARB
1993: 10.
95
Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism (1996).
96
Such as the seven heavens (chapter 2), numerical symbolism (chapter 3), the origin of the designation
of Jesus as ‘Son of Man’ (chapter 4), the origin of Christian baptism (chapter 7).
97
COLLINS 1996: 20.
98
For an extensive study on the Patristic exegesis with a substantial bibliography, see: KANNENGIESSER
2004 (2 vols.); see also the theological commentary on the Book of Acts by Jaroslav PELIKAN (2005).
14
Eastern Europe Liaison Committee of Studiorum Novi Testamenty Societas (SNTS). 99
The papers of the first four conferences have already been published and set the
premises for a more considerable treatment of the patristic-biblical approach. 100

Nevertheless, the first monograph on the reception of Luke and Acts in the period prior
to Irenaeus is Andrew Gregory’s extensive doctoral dissertation. 101 He examines the
attestation of Luke’s work before the first explicit witness (Irenaeus) and the sources
prior to the Lukan composition. 102 He does not find any external evidence for the
reception of Luke and Acts before the middle of the second century but concludes that
this lack of evidence does not ‘mean that these texts were not yet used, let alone not yet
written’. 103 Further studies on the reception of Luke-Acts were published in Andrew
Gregory and Christopher Tuckett’s New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers series. 104

Recently, Francis de Chaignon published a theological study, analysing the reception of

the Ascension mystery in the liturgical tradition of the Christian Church. He surveys
both the liturgical texts and creedal statements, and the biblical texts behind them. In the
third part of his study he analyses some of the most important commentators, from the
patristic writers to modern Catholic theologians who interpret the Ascension event
(Irenaeus, Athanasius, Hilary of Poitiers, Augustine, Maxim the Confessor, John of
Damascus, Bernard of Clairvaux, Thomas Aquinas, Bonaventure, Pierre de Bérulle,
Hans Urs von Balthasar and Joseph Ratzinger). The author’s theological reflexion

99
The first conference (held in Neamţ, Romania, 1998) addressed the matter of the interpretation of
Scripture, linking the biblical text to the Patristic interpretation within the Chuch. The second conference
(Rila Monastery, Bulgaria, 2001) discussed the impact of the Church Fathers’ exegesis and the limits of
the historical-critical method of interpretation. The unity of the Church in the New Testament was the
theme of the third conference (Saint Petersburg, Russia, 2005), examining the ecclesiology of Scripture
and the Church’s mission. The fourth (Sâmbăta de Sus, Romania, 2007) assessed the idea of Prayer in the
New Testament by comparing the two traditions (Eastern and Western). The fifth conference of the series
is expected to be held in Minsk (Belarus, 2-9 September 2010), concerning Gospel Images of Jesus Christ
in Church Tradition and in Biblical Scholarship.
100
DUNN; KLEIN; LUZ; MIHOC (eds.), Auslegung der Bibel in orthodoxer und westlicher Perspektive
(2000); DIMITROV; DUNN; LUZ; NIEBUHR (eds.), Das Alte Testament als christliche Bibel in orthodoxer
und westlicher Sicht (2004); cf. the review by DOERING 2005: 157. ALEXEEV; KARAKOLIS; LUZ (eds.),
Einheit der Kirche im Neuen Testament (2008); KLEIN; MIHOC; NIEBUHR (eds.), Das Gebet im Neuen
Testament (2009).
101
The Reception of Luke and Acts in the Period before Irenaeus (publ. 2003).
102
Cf. the reviews by PAGET 2004: 742-744 and MARSHALL 2006: 121-124.
103
GREGORY 2003: 353.
104
GREGORY; TUCKETT (eds.), The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (2005) and
Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers (2005).
15
focuses on the Liturgy, Scripture and Tradition, emphasising the importance of the
reception of the biblical text within the Church for its transmission and preservation. 105

1.2 Proposed Methodology and Research Questions

Can the bodily Ascension of Christ be considered a historical narration or a real event?
And also, how historically accurate is Lukan narration? What are the traditions and
sources behind Luke’s Ascension narratives? Why and in which way can we link
Christ’s Ascension to the ascension tradition of the Jewish literature in the Hellenistic-
Roman period? Is the historical-critical method enough in examining the biblical texts
in order to present an accurate understanding of the episode? How did the early
Christian church interpret the Ascension?

All these questions were partially answered in the previous studies. However, none of
those were meant to offer an inclusive view of the Ascension and its interpretation
within the primary Church.

Mikeal C. Parsons considered that the historical-critical method, while recognising its
value, implies some ‘serious limitations with that approach in understanding and
interpreting the biblical narratives’. 106 He combined both the diachronic (text, form and
source criticism) and synchronic (narrative criticism) analyses to set a foundation upon
which a theological reading of the text as canonical scripture can be constructed. This is
the approach I propose in this study.

First of all, following Zwiep’s direction we shall explore the context of the rapture
(ascension) stories within the wider Jewish literature, studying the parallels between
Elisha-Elijah, among others, and Jesus. Following this, a translation, textual analysis
(structure, syntactic, and semantic) and, using the Sleeman’s ‘thirdspatiality’ approach,

105
‘La liturgie procure au croyant un accès vivant aux mystères du Christ. En célébrant un mystère
particulier, elle le relie à l’ensemble des mystères et surtout à leur sommet, le mystère pascal. L’étude
liturgique d’un mystère du Christ oblige à prendre en compte ce caractère situé. Elle rend attentif à ses
effets dans le croyant. Elle permet la saisie vitale du rapport entre Écriture et Tradition : la célébration est
un acte de Tradition qui assume dans son écoute de l’Écriture deux millénaires de réception,
d’assimilation, de traduction vivante et d’annonce du mystère du Christ. Ces trois dimensions vécues dans
la célébration seront théologiquement reprises et explicitées, formant les trois parties de cette étude.’
CHAIGNON 2008: 6.
106
PARSONS 1987: 18.
16
an interpretation of the texts (Luke 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11) will be proposed in the
subsequent chapter. Furthermore, a comparison between the two Ascension narratives
will conclude the third section. In the fourth chapter of the survey the reception and
interpretation of the Ascension in the context of ancient Christianity will be examined
(New Testament apocryphal writings and early Patristic writings). The reception and
interpretation of the Ascension within early Christian thought are relevant for the
discussion on Wirkungsgeschichte and the importance and impact the event itself
received, as presented by Luke. 107 Finally, some finishing remarks and conclusions of
my investigation will be made in the last chapter. I considered it relevant to include two
excursuses: one on the Jewish Hekhalot literature and Merkabah mysticism with special
emphasis on 3 Enoch, and another one on Jesus’ Ascension accounts or allusions in the
Gospels according to Mark (16:19) and John (20:17).

107
Although serious attempts were made in this direction (cf. GREGORY & TUCKETT) the subject of the
reception and interpretation of the Ascension in Luke-Acts in the period before the fourth century remains
insufficiently explored.
17
 CHAPTER 2: RAPTURE ACCOUNTS IN THE OLD TESTAMENT AND ANCIENT JUDAISM

2.1 Old Testament (including additional composition in the LXX)

2.1.1 Elijah and Elisha in 1-2 Kings

Of all the prophets Elijah is the only one of whom is written that he ascended into
heaven. As Fritz affirms, ‘even Moses, the greatest of the prophets so far, had to die in
the land of Moab, although he was buried by God himself and his grave remained
unknown (Deut 34:5-6).’ 108 Apart from Elijah, only of Enoch (Gen 5:21-24) is it written
that he was taken into heaven by God and gained immortality. 109

Examining the books of 1 and 2 Kings, Thomas L. Brodie affirms that ‘the Elijah-Elisha
narrative consists of 1Kgs 16:29-2Kgs 13:25’ and defends the unity of the two prophets’
lives and work narratives. 110 The account of the succession of Elisha and the ascension
of Elijah we find in 2Kgs 2:1-18. 111 The story recounts the last event in Elijah’s life, his
translation, and the announcement of his successor, Elisha. ‘By pronouncing Elisha, his
specifically appointed disciple (1Kgs 19:19-21), as his successor, Elijah passes on his
own spirit and authority to the new prophet.’ 112 The passage of 2Kgs 2:11-12 implies a
supernatural carrying of the prophet, an ascension story:

As they continued walking and talking, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the
two of them, and Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into heaven. Elisha kept watching and
crying out, ‘Father, father! The chariots of Israel and its horsemen!’ But when he could no
longer see him, he grasped his own clothes and tore them in two pieces. 113

108
FRITZ 2003: 235.
109
Cf. OSWALD 1982: 502-504; BERGER 1976: 42-52.
110
BRODIE 2000: 1-12.
111
The book of 2 Kings, originally joined with 1 Kings as a single work, is a composite writing which
tells the story of Israel and Judah between the 10th and the 6th centuries B.C. The division of the two books
was introduced by the translators of LXX (in which 2 Kings becomes 4 Reigns), and was subsequently
adopted by Jerome in Vulgate and by most modern translators. In the Eastern Orthodox Bible, where the
Old Testament translations are based mostly upon the LXX, the book is designated as 4 Kings (Βασιλειῶν
Δʹ). The book of 2 Kings opens with the conclusion of the Prophet Elijah’s mission, during the short reign
of King Ahaziah of Israel (9th century B.C.).
112
FRITZ 2003: 234.
113
2Kgs 2:11-12, in COOGAN (NRSV) 2007: 536.
18
The text alludes that Elijah’s ascension is in fact a temporary movement, and not a final
one. ‘Because the narrative includes no reference to Elijah’s death, he is portrayed in the
later tradition as an eternal figure, who will return at the time of the day of YHWH (Mal.
3:23-24).’ 114 The belief that prophets were taken and carried by God towards different
places (e.g. the prophet Habakkuk in Bel 1:33) gave birth to the interpretation that
Elijah, as well as other prophets, continued his life somewhere else and died there. ‘It
might be mentioned that there seems to have been a popular belief that God lifted up the
prophets from one place, and carried them to another as the occasion demanded.’ 115
Although the chariots of fire and horses of fire are mentioned here for the first time,
they will appear again in the later Elisha stories. The chariot symbol had many
interpretations for Israelites. 116 One of the meanings is based on the considerable role
played by the chariots ‘in the fortunes of the Israelite tribes in the early days of their
settlement in Canaan. The Canaanites had then possessed chariots and this had given
them weapon superiority over the Israelites... Thus chariots came to be for Israel the
symbol of overwhelming military force’ 117 and, therefore, chariots served a function of
defending the nation. Elisha and Elijah’s association with the chariot points towards
their function as defenders of the nation against its enemies. 118 The symbol of the
chariot and its Wirkungsgeschichte originated the later Merkabah mysticism of the
Hekhalot literature.

Moses, who goes on Mount Horeb (Sinai) for forty days and nights, and receives the
revelation from God himself (1Kgs 19:8), is presented in typology with Elijah. 119 Elijah

114
SWEENEY 2007: 274.
115
BRONNER 1968: 126. This idea is suggested in verse 16 where the prophets request Elisha to let them
send their fifty servants and search for the master. Elisha refuses this because of his strong conviction that
Elijah was taken in heaven by God, and not ‘upon some mountain, or into some valley’ (2Kgs 2:16).
116
Initially, the chariot was a symbol of the sun god of the Canaanites. In Jewish tradition it appears in
relation to YHWH and His angels. ‘Here the image of chariots seems to be used to evoke the idea of the
power of Yahweh. The solar myth was probably in the mind of the writer as a means of visualising
Elijah’s passage to heaven. In other passages it is impossible to say whether its source is human chariotry
or divine chariots.’ ROBINSON 1976: 26.
117
ROBINSON 1976: 26.
118
‘Bei JHWH’s Wolkenwagen is an einen furchterweckenden Streitwagen zu denken, womit JHWH
seine Feinde überfällt. JHWH’s fahren durch den Himmel ist ein Erweis, daß er dort Herr und Meister ist;
der ganze Himmel ist seine Domäne; von dort kann er über die Welt herrschen und den Seinen zu Hilfe
kommen.’ HOUTMAN 1993: 326; cf. also: BERGEN 1999: 63: ‘The sudden appearance of the military
images of horses and chariots reminds readers that this is not only a story about prophets and their
relationship to each other. Elijah was and Elisha is expected to be a major player in the political and
military life of Israel.’
119
Cf. HERR 1997: 230.
19
is also found as the prefigurement of the life and ministry of Jesus Christ. As Richard
Hess suggests, ‘it is this ministry of life that forms the closest living model of Jesus’ life
and work in the New Testament. Again and again the miracles that Jesus performs are
anticipated by prophets’ works in the books of Kings.’ 120 The parallels between the
departure story of Elijah in 2 Kings and the Ascension of Jesus in Luke-Acts are
evident: after an introduction (v. 1) the two prophets travel together towards Jordan,
where Elijah divides the water 121 (vv. 2-8). Following the promise of sending ‘a double
sharing of Elijah’s spirit’ (vv. 9-10), the prophet departs in a whirlwind, ascending into
heaven (v. 11). Elisha, remaining alone and witnessing the departure, cries and rends
Elijah’s garments as a symbol of the final separation (v. 12). He returns and performs
the same miracle as his master, dividing the river Jordan, and receives the recognition as
the rightful successor of the ascended one (vv. 13-15). Markus Öhler demonstrated that
Luke used the Elijah material in composing Jesus’ Ascension story, and thus the
common terminology and motives in Luke-Acts can be explained. 122

Although the thought of the ascension is introduced by the author in the first verse of
the passage (2Kgs 2:1), the event itself is presented in the eleventh. The translation of
the prophet Elijah is reported twice in the verse 11, the first time only alluded to (11a).
He is not presented to be dead or buried, but ascended to heaven. The chiastic structure
of the passage is centred on verse 11. ‘Elijah’s ascension marks the conclusion of his
earthly career and is conditio sine qua non for the transfer of his spirit to Elisha, the
fulfilment of which is closely related to Elisha’s seeing Elijah go to heaven.’ 123 Elijah’s
ascension is seen as the reward for his virtuous life and his zeal for the law. 124

Fretheim sees as the central theme of the narrative the transfer of the prophetic spirit
from Elijah to Elisha, rather than the ascension of the prophet. 125 The ascension of
Elijah is witnessed by his successor Elisha, on whose life and work the book of 2 Kings
will focus from this moment on. 126 Elisha’s sorrowful cry represents the climax of the

120
HESS 2008: 122.
121
Here we can distinguish the initiating journey of Elisha, in comparison with the exodus out of Egypt of
the Israelites (Exod 13), under the command of Moses who divided the waters (Exod 14:21). For the
comparison between the two figures (Moses and Elijah), see: ÖHLER 1997: 122-127.
122
ÖHLER, Elia im Neuen Testament, pp. 203-215.
123
ZWIEP 1997: 59.
124
1Macc 2:58 states that ‘Elijah, because of great zeal for the law, was taken up into heaven’.
125
FRETHEIM 1999: 136.
126
BERGEN 1999: 55.
20
entire chapter and, in Hobbs’ opinion, its form of lament was adopted by Luke (Lk
13:34). 127 Elisha is presented in comparison with Elijah as the image of the normal
rhythm of life. After the departure of his master, Elisha becomes a full prophet like
Elijah, ‘but then just after he reaches this high point, small signs emerge of advancing
years: he is bald (2Kgs 2:23); he breaks his journey to eat and, later, to eat and rest
(2Kgs 4:8-10); he has a house of his own, in which he stays (2Kgs 5:9-10) and to which
he is later accompanied by the elders (2Kgs 6:32).’ 128 His death and burial are depicted
in 2Kgs 13:20-21 and even his bones continued to perform wonders, an argument of his
powers as a great prophet. Furthermore, Sweeney observes that ‘the resurrection motif
is characteristic of the Elijah and Elisha traditions in 1Kgs 17:17-24 and 2Kgs 4:8-
37’. 129 Elijah’s ministry on earth is continued by Elisha, and this is the reason why the
two prophets cannot be examined separately. As Fretheim states, ‘in some inexplicable
way, Elijah lives on in the ministry of Elisha; Elisha is Elijah one more time, larger than
life’. 130 Scott Hill rejects the idea that Elijah and Elisha journeyed together and even
declares that they probably never met. 131 However, his arguments are not convincing
and the fact that Elisha inherited Elijah’s literary legacy (oral and written) cannot be
contested. 132

The tradition of Elijah’s ascension to heaven in a chariot of fire was preserved and
developed in Jewish literature. The Christian authors used the Elijah-Elisha tradition
and interpreted it as the prefigurement of Jesus’ Ascension and the beginning of the
apostolic mission. 133 Two other Jewish texts containing Elijah’s rapture narratives are
analysed in this chapter (Sir 48:9-12 and Lives of the Prophets 21:15), with the purpose
of comparing and examining the different accounts of the same tradition.

127
The expression ‘Father! father!’ is interpreted as being both an address of respect (and maybe as the
title of the leader of the prophetic group), and as a manifestation of sorrow at the departure of the master.
HOBBS 1985: 22.
128
BRODIE 2000: 7.
129
SWEENEY 2007: 360.
130
FRETHEIM 1999: 140.
131
HILL 1992: 69: ‘I find it likely that Elijah and Elisha never met. If Elijah had lived to see Ahab’s death
at Ramoth-Gilead, would this not have been noted somehow in the text? Elisha was a player in regional
politics who somehow became connected with the cult of Elijah – by an individual, grassroots, or
institutional move. The connection could have originated with the Deuteronomistic historian, but I doubt
it; it goes back at least to the Jehuid historian.’
132
RENTERÍA 1992: 119-120.
133
For a comprehensive survey concerning the usage and interpretation of the Elijah-Elisha story in the
ancient Christian literature, see: POIROT 1997.
21
2.1.2 Elijah in Sirach 48:9-12

The book of Sirach 134 is a Jewish work from the early second century B.C., included in
the LXX as a canonical book. 135 Originally written in Hebrew by Ben Sira, probably in
Alexandria, it is a collection of ethical teachings. 136 Several allusions to Sirach can be
found in the New Testament (of which the most relevant for our study being the
blessing of Simon the High Priest, 50:20-21, found in the ascension narrative of Lk
24:50). Interpreting the prophecy from Mal 4:5-6 the author makes an eschatological
reference to Elijah, based on the ascension narrative in 2Kgs 2:11-12: 137

You were taken up by a whirlwind of fire, in a chariot with horses of fire. At the appointed
time, it is written, you are destined to calm the wrath of God before it breaks out in fury,
to turn the hearts of parents to their children, and to restore the tribes of Jacob. Happy are
those who saw you and were adorned with your love! For we also shall surely live. When
Elijah was enveloped in the whirlwind, Elisha was filled with his spirit. He performed
twice as many signs, and marvels with every utterance of his mouth. Never in his lifetime
did he tremble before any ruler, nor could anyone intimidate him at all. 138

After reporting on both Elijah’s miraculous and political accomplishments (48:3-9), the
narration ‘turns to the eschatological deeds which Elijah was expected to perform’ 139
(48:10). Ben Sira mentions the two people in the Old Testament who were taken up into
heaven while still alive, Enoch (44:16) and Elijah, and expresses the expectation of the
Prophet Elijah’s return. 140 Elijah is assumed into heaven not only for his merits but
especially to fulfil a special mission at the end of times. 141 Moreover, Elijah’s successor,
Elisha, is mentioned as receiving the spirit of his master and the power of prophecy, and
to perform wonders. The only reference regarding the resurrection of the dead is found

134
Also known as Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, the Wisdom (or Proverbs) of Ben Sira, and
Ecclesiasticus.
135
Cf. WISCHMEYER 1995: 2-7.
136
Cf. SAUER 2000: 26-35.
137
‘In the Mishnah this verse from Malachi was interpreted as restoring the tribes of Jacob, i.e. gathering
together refugees and exiles: Elijah will not come to declare unclean or clean, to remove far or to bring
nigh, but to remove afar those (families) that were brought nigh by violence and to bring nigh those
(families) that were removed afar by violence (Eduyoth 8:7).’ SNAITH 1974: 240.
138
Sir 48:9-12, in COOGAN (NRSV) 2007: 169-170.
139
LEE 1986: 211.
140
CORLEY 2008: 180.
141
‘Ainsi se trouve précisé le motif de cet enlèvement au ciel, non seulement les mérites de sa vie, mais,
sur la base de ces mérites, une mission à accomplir aux derniers temps. C’est ainsi que la littérature
apocalyptique peut s’emparer de l’épisode pour expliciter la mission finale du prophète. Et nous
établirons plus loin un parallèle entre le récit du deuxième live des Rois et le récit de l’Ascension au début
des Actes, la réminiscence de la figure d’Élie constituant une clé de compréhension supplémentaire de
l’événement.’ CHAIGNON 2008: 54.
22
in the description of Elijah. 142 Sauer regards as a later interpolation in the text the
eschatological expectation of Elijah’s return. 143 Based on the account from 2 Kings,
Edward Wright observed that ‘while ascent to heaven was not a central tenet of the
biblical religious imagination, the ascent motif became prominent in many
Mediterranean and Near Eastern cultures during the course of the Greco-Roman
period. 144

2.1.3 Enoch in Genesis 5

Enoch of Seth’s line is the first figure in the Old Testament who was taken by God into
heaven, and the only one mentioned in the Generations to ‘walk with God’. He is
described as the father of Methuselah in the short account in the book of Genesis, and
also as the seventh from Adam. ‘In biblical genealogies the seventh member is often
specially favoured, and Enoch, the seventh from Adam conforms to this pattern.’ 145

When Enoch had lived for sixty-five years, he became the father of Methuselah. Enoch
walked with God after the birth of Methuselah for three hundred years, and had other sons
and daughters. Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred and sixty-five years. Enoch
walked with God; then he was no more, because God took him. 146

The text describes Enoch as having a direct connection with God. The place and/or time
of the ascension are not mentioned, and nor is the reason. 147 Wenham argues that these
particular details are also meant to distinguish Enoch from Cain’s son, also called
Enoch (Gen 4:17). This early tradition developed in the three pseudepigraphical books
of Enoch. 148 The rabbinic readings of the passage consider Enoch to be a pious man
taken away by God before he would become corrupted, and that he did not die. 149 The
similarities of the Enoch traditions to the ascension of Elijah in Sirach are clear, as seen
within the apocalyptical literature. The Fathers of the Church interpreted this episode as

142
MULDER 2003: 325-326.
143
SAUER 2000: 327.
144
WRIGHT 2004: 130.
145
WENHAM 1987: 127.
146
Gen 5:21-24, in COOGAN (NRSV) 2007: 18.
147
Cf. CHAIGNON 2008: 52.
148
‘Die Wendung meinte in der alten Tradition, dass Henoch mit Gott in einer direkten, unmittelbaren
Verbindung stand und so auch mit Gottes Pläne und Absichten vertraut war. Dies ist der Ansatzpunkt für
die Bedeutung, die die Gestalt Henoch in einer schon früh einsetzenden, aber erst in der apocalyptischen
Literatur zutage kommenden Tradition bekam.’ WESTERMANN 1974: 485.
149
The book of Jubilees (4:23) develops a biography of Enoch and depicts him, through the angel’s
discourse, as judging the children of men in heaven. For an expanded discussion on the Jewish view of
Enoch, see the subsequent subchapter on the Books of 1, 2 Enoch and Jubilees.
23
a work of the Holy Spirit, 150 or as a demonstration that the physical body does not
prevent humans from becoming saints. 151 Tertullian affirmed the temporary status of
Enoch’s life without death, saying that ‘Enoch and Elijah were transported hence
without suffering death, which was only postponed. The day will come when they will
actually die that they may extinguish Antichrist with their blood.’152 Sometimes,
Enoch’s disappearance from the earthly scene is read as a poetic euphemism for death,
expressing that Enoch did not experience a normal death. 153 ‘Although it [the text of
Gen 5:21-24] does not explicitly say that Enoch did not die there is great unanimity
among the interpreters up to the period pertinent to our investigation (first century A.D.)
that Enoch did escape death and was bodily transferred from human society into the
divine realm.’ 154

The Targum Onkelos on Gen 5:24 reads that Enoch had in fact died: ‘And Enoch
walked in (the) fear of the Lord; the he was no more, for the Lord had caused him to
die.’ 155 Nonetheless, some other TO versions read: ‘The Lord did not cause him to die’,
sustained by the Derek ’Ereẓ Zuṭa 1.18. However, Bernard Grossfeld emphasised the
general rabbinic view that Enoch had in fact died (confirmed by Bereshit Rabba
24.1). 156

2.1.4 Psalm 110 (109 LXX)

This psalm is relevant in our discussion on the ascension narratives because of its
interpretation concerning the heavenly enthronement of Jesus. 157 The first verse of
Psalm 110 was often interpreted by the Christian writers as a clear allusion to the

150
On the coming of the Spirit on Pentecost, AMBROSE (LOUTH 2001: 119) commented: ‘Good are the
wings of love, the true wings that flew about through the mouths of the apostles, and the wings of fire that
spoke the pure word. On these wings Enoch flew when he was snatched up to heaven’.
151
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on John 75 (in LOUTH 2001: 120): ‘The nature of the flesh did not
prevent Paul, for instance, from becoming such a saint as he became or Peter from receiving the keys of
heaven. Further, Enoch, though possessed of the flesh, was taken by God and seen no more.’
152
Tertullian, On the Soul 50.5, in LOUTH 2001: 121.
153
Cf. WENHAM 1987: 128; WESTERMANN 1974: 486; MOBERLY 2009: 75.
154
ZWIEP 1997: 41.
155
ABERBACH; GROSSFELD 1982: 48-49.
156
‘The Targum emphasizes Enoch’s death in an attempt to counter the sectarian tendency to glorify
Enoch who was said to have been translated to heaven alive and to have been transformed into an angel.
The anti-sectarian Rabbinic attitude reduced Enoch to more human proportions, with human failings,
alleging that he had died before his time because his righteousness was not expected to endure; cf. Gen.
Rab. XXV:1, p. 238f.’ GROSSFELD 1988: 51.
157
HENGEL 1995.1: 119-225.
24
glorification of Christ and his sitting at the right hand of the Father in heaven. 158 There
is no general agreement concerning the date of the Psalm 159 and, based on the cultic
elements and vocabulary, Hellen Jefferson demonstrates its Canaanite background. 160
This short psalm was classified by John W. Hilber as ‘cultic enthronement prophecy
with compositional unity dating to the monarchic period.’ 161

The Lord says to my Lord, ‘Sit at my right hand until I make your enemies your
footstool.’ 162

The phrase is quoted or alluded to 23 times through the New Testament, thus proving
the importance it received as a messianic prophecy in the apostolic age. 163 The original
sense of the verse ‘was evidently that a particular Israelite monarch reigned with the
power and authority of Yahweh himself. Possibly it alludes to the physical situation of
the king’s throne to the right (or south) of Solomon’s temple, where God was believed to
be enthroned.’ 164 The passage was interpreted in the late rabbinic texts to the whole of
Israel, and sometimes linked to the messianic expectation. 165

Another messianic prophecy was seen in verse 4, as an argument for the priesthood of
Jesus. Ancient kings, including the Israelite kings, sometimes performed priestly duties,
a function that Christ as God and Messiah would hold as well. It was interpreted by the
early Christians that the psalm affirms the glory of Christ and that the Church lives by

158
HENGEL 1991: 43-73; HAHN 1963: 126-132.
159
‘Psalm 110 is necessarily ascribed either to a very early or to a quite late period in the growth of the
Psalter. The picture of the warrior-priest who will smite his enemies by the power of Yahweh can be
connected either with the early days when the Kings of Israel still combined military and religious
functions, or with the much later time when the ruling high-priests of the Maccabean line were engaged in
warlike pursuits.’ HARDY 1945: 385. Th. BOOIJ (1991: 406) argues that the Psalm can be dated before the
exile, based on the priest mentioned in v. 4.
160
JEFFERSON 1954: 152-156.
161
HILBER 2003: 366.
162
Ps. 110 (109):1, in COOGAN (NRSV) 2007: 874. GERLEMAN (1981: 17-18) argued with poor arguments
that the ‘right hand’ should be translated as the ‘south land’ and that it refers strictly to the Judean
territory.
163
In Luke-Acts we find the mention or allusion to Ps. 110:1 six times: Lk 20:42-43; 22:69; Acts 2:33;
2:34-35; 5:31; 7:55-56. Seven more times it can be traced whithin early Christian writings: 1 Clem. 36:5;
Pol Phil 2:1; Barn. 12:10; Apoc. Pet. 6; Sib. Or. 2:243; Apcr. Jas. 14:30 f; Heg. (EH) 2.23.13. For a
complete liste, see: loci citati vel allegati, in NA27: 789.
164
HAY 1973: 20.
165
‘In sum, rabbinic exegetes often interpreted Ps. 110 messianically, and that custom was probably
established among Jews of Jesus’ time. The rabbis were inclined to develop this line of exegesis with
visions of a messiah whose work and victories were earthly.’ HAY 1973: 33.
25
the power and guidance of the exalted Christ. 166 ‘In Luke-Acts, for example, Jesus’
heavenly position appears to be understood both in a quasi-spatial sense and in terms of
a lack of ongoing communication. The ascended Jesus is no longer on earth; he remains
in heaven during the period before the parousia.’ 167

2.2 Jewish Writings from the Hellenistic-Roman Period

In the subsequent section of the present study an analysis of the documents containing
different ascension traditions will be made in order to establish their impact and
reception in the Hellenistic-Roman framework. The following analysed texts belong to
the Jewish apocryphal writings written in the first and second century and reflect the
ascension-rapture traditions of the Old Testament period. Their relevance for this study
resides in their use within the early Christian Church, interpreted as prefigurements of
the Ascension of Jesus. It is important to explore the context in which the author of
Luke and Acts assembled the Ascension narrative within the first-century Judaic
framework.

2.2.1 The Lives of the Prophets

The content of this apocryphon might be summarised as the Codex Marchalianus did:
‘The names of the prophets, and where they are from, and where they died and how, and
where they lie’. 168 The book, also known as Vitae Prophetarum, represents a summary
of short biographies of the Old Testament prophets. The collection treats the four major
and twelve minor prophets, along with seven other prophets from the historical books.
The book is extant in Greek manuscripts and other dependent translations (of which are
Syriac, Ethiopic, Latin and Armenian). 169 Although some scholars proposed Syriac as
the original language of composition, the majority believe that the Greek translation was
166
‘Although the exaltation imagery of Ps. 110 easily lends itself to a symbolic-figurative explanation in
terms of divine appointment to a position of honour and dignity without the notion of an ascent to heaven
– after all, Ps. 110 was addressed to an early king at his ascension to an earthly throne! – it seems that
from the very beginning of Christological reflection the belief that Jesus was ‘exalted at the right hand of
God’ has had an overtly spatial overtone, implying a geographical transfer from earth to heaven (that is,
exaltation at the right hand of God carried with the thought of exaltation to the right hand of God).’
ZWIEP 1997: 126.
167
HAY 1973: 101.
168
HARE, OTP 2 1985: 379. For other titles of the book found in other MSS, see: SCHWEMER 1996.2: 3*.
169
For a comprehensive list of exitant MSS and recensions, see: SCHWEMER 1997: 540-543; SCHWEMER
1995: 12-22.
26
made after a Semitic language version. 170 Dated to the first half of the first century A.D.,
the work survives only in Christian manuscripts. 171 Even though it is considered by the
majority of scholars to be of Jewish origin (composed in Palestine 172), David Satran, by
comparing the Lives of the Prophets with the vita of Daniel, argues that Vitae
Prophetarum must be regarded as a Christian document. 173 Ana Maria Schwemer
contradicted Satran and regarded his arguments as inconsistent. 174

In the Life of Elijah the Thesbite (21:1-15) a very short account of his departure is
found in the last verse. The text states that ‘finally he was taken up in a chariot of
fire’ 175 (21:15). Based on the rapture story from 2 Kings 2:11 and Sirach 48:9 the short
description of Elijah’s ascension in a chariot of fire shows that this tradition appears to
be a well-known fact in the Lives of the Prophets. 176

2.2.2 Fourth Ezra (Chapters 3-14 of 2 Esdras)

Fourth Ezra 177 is an apocalyptic writing, and although it was written in the first
century 178 by a Jew, was transmitted down through the centuries within the Christian

170
MITTMANN-RICHERT 2000: 157.
171
The current text (the ‘anonymous recension’) reveals several Christian additions of little importance
for our study. Cf. BERNHEIMER 1935: 200-203.
172
TORREY (1946: 11) argues that the writing is likely to be composed in Jerusalem, because of the
accurate and detailed information the author gives regarding the city.
173
In SATRAN’s (1995: 119-120) view, although the work is based on several earlier Jewish traditions, it
remains, nevertheless, an extensively edited text of a Christian authorship. ‘One must read all such
materials which have passed through the filter of non-Jewish transmission with a heightened sensitivity to
their more subtle reflections of Christian thought or practice. It may often be no more than an aberrant
phrase or a lexical incongruity that alerts us to the possibility of an unsuspected significance, in turn
demanding a correspondingly altered historical and religious context... The very act of redaction is
equally an act of “composition”, i.e. the creation of a new literary entity with a meaning and function
proper to its historical framework... The encounter with the text leaves us with the paradox that a work
which appears most indubitably Jewish can, in fact, be most deeply Christian.’
174
SCHWEMER 1995: 371: ‘Die Daniel-Vita ist in ihrem Ursprung kein Zeugnis byzantinischer
Frömmigkeit, wie es SATRAN nicht müde wird zu wiederholen, sondern der hellenistisch-jüdischen
Frömmigkeit, die in diesem Fall – wie es auch sonst so oft zu beobachten ist – deren Vorgängerin ist.’
175
HARE, OTP 2: 397.
176
‘Bei Elia tritt and die Stelle der Todes- und Grabesnotiz natürlich – dem Schrifttext entsprechend – die
Angabe von seiner Entrückung. Sowohl im alten Orient wie in der hellenistisch-römischer Zeit war die
Entrückung in die himmlische Welt ein oft literarisch und ikonographisch ausgestaltetes Thema.’
SCHWEMER 1996: 226-227.
177
The book is identified in the Latin Vulgate as Esdrae liber IV, and as a part of an expanded book
entitled 2 Esdras. Chapters 1-2, 15-16 are considered later Christian additions, designated as 5 and,
respectively, 6 Ezra. 4 Ezra thus refers to this central portion of 2 Esdras. Cf. METZGER 1957: 21-22;
METZGER, OTP 1 1983: 516-517.
27
Church. 179 It is generally held that the original text was composed in Hebrew, even
though the Hebrew version has not survived. In the late second century Clement of
Alexandria (Stromata 3:16) quotes Fourth Ezra in Greek, this suggesting that the Greek
translation was probably made in the second century. From the Greek version, which
has not survived either, come other translations, the writing being known only in Latin,
Syriac, Ethiopic, Georgian, Armenian, Arabic translations, and a fragment in Coptic. 180

The writing (4Ezra 3-14) contains seven episodes, or visions in which Angel Uriel is
depicted in dialogue with Ezra, the biblical priest and scribe. In the second episode
(4Ezra 5:21-6:34) Ezra’s speech emphasises on the election of Israel by the Lord’s
grace, including a prediction of redemption and a reference to the people who were
translated to heaven 181 (6:25-26):

And it shall come to pass that whoever remains after all that I have foretold to you shall
himself be saved and shall see my salvation and the end of my world. And they shall see
the men who were taken up, who from their birth have not tasted death; and the heart of
182
the earth’s inhabitants shall be changed and converted to a different spirit.

Verse 26 ‘predicts that those who were assumed to heaven without dying will appear
and that the hearts of the inhabitants of the earth will be changed to a different spirit’ 183.
The text probably refers to Enoch and Elijah, although their names are not explicitly
mentioned. ‘In context it is clear that at least Enoch and Elijah are being referred to. In
later Jewish and Christian sources Elijah and Enoch became steady companions in the
eschatological course of events.’ 184 In the epilogue of the book (the seventh vision,
14:7-9) Ezra becomes a new Moses figure, invested by God with the mission to carry
out his task (giving of the law).

And now I say to you: Lay up in your heart the signs that I have seen, and the
interpretation that you have heard; for you shall be taken up from among men, and

178
STONE (1991: 358-360) demonstrated that the original composition was written soon after the
destruction of the Second Temple (about A.D. 100).
179
LONGENECKER 1995: 17.
180
It is generally accepted that the Latin translation is the most reliable. Cf. LONGENECKER 1995: 18;
LICHTENBERGER 1974-2003: 292.
181
Uriel mentions the existence of others who were ‘taken up’ alive to heaven, such as Enoch, Elijah, and
associates them with the Messiah - Son of God. Cf. HOGAN 2008: 207-218.
182
4 Ezra 6:25-26. Translated by STONE 1990: 163.
183
STONE 1990: 172.
184
ZWIEP 2001: 339.
28
 henceforth you shall be my servant and with those who are like you, until the times are
185
ended.

This allusion to the Messiah, 186 as the Son of God, is probably based on the Ebed
Yahweh portrait (the Servant of God) of Deutero-Isaiah. 187 This prediction about Ezra’s
personal faith (14:9), his assumption alive to heaven is affirming that ‘there he will be
preserved with the Messiah (“my servant”) and the righteous until the end of times. In 4
Ezra there are a number of references to humans who were taken up to heaven alive, an
idea that is related to an overall evaluation of life and death’ 188. The text seems to imply
Ezra’s return to earth for completing his eschatological task in the endtime, especially if
compared with the Enoch and Elijah ascension narratives. In 4Ezra 14:9, the priest is
said to become a servant of God and ‘those who are like you’ might refer to ‘choice
persons like Enoch and Elijah.’ 189 Nonetheless, in 14:23, 36, 42, 44-45 a period of forty
days is mentioned, in which he must instruct five men ‘to ensure his secret wisdom will
not be lost to later generations’. 190

These two accounts of ascensions represent a vivid image of the strong tradition of
assumption stories in the post-Temple apocalyptic writings. In the context of the
apocalyptic writings, and ‘given the prominence of apocalyptic traditions about Enoch,
it must have been only a matter of time before other (more prominent and less
controversial) historical figures were claimed to have received heavenly revelations and
were believed to have been granted the privilege of being bodily taken up to heaven. It
is likely that Ezra’s activity as priest and scribe made him an eligible candidate for
apocalyptic speculations.’ 191

185
4 Ezra 14:7-9. Translated by STONE 1990: 414.
186
STONE 2006: 335-336.
187
LONGENECKER 1995: 78-79. For a detailed commentary on the Messiah as the Son of God in 4 Ezra
see: STONE 1989: 71-75.
188
STONE 1990: 420-421. He suggests that this prophecy is probably part of a divine speech found in 4
Ezra 14:3-18.
189
MYERS 1974: 322.
190
ZWIEP 2001: 340.
191
ZWIEP 1997: 72.
29
2.2.3 The First Book of Enoch

The Book of Enoch (or 1 Enoch) is the oldest of the three Pseudepigrapha attributed to
Enoch, son of Jared (Gen 5:18). The depiction of Enoch in Gen 5:22-24 192 gave rise to a
tradition that affirms his ascension and that he saw ‘the mysteries of the universe, the
future of the world, and the predetermined course of human history.’ 193

1 Enoch represents a composite work, an anthology of five different writings and two
short appendices, composed by an unknown number of authors. The complete version
of 1 Enoch is extant only in Ethiopic (Ge’ez), but fragments are found in Aramaic,
Greek, and Latin. 194 After the discovery of the Aramaic fragments from the Dead Sea
Scrolls (Qumran Cave 4, in 1952), Milik categorised the Ethiopic Vorlage into five
primary books and a later addition (the last chapter, 1En 108). 195 Originally composed
between the second century B.C. and the first century A.D., the Book of Enoch
‘originated in Judaea and was in use at Qumran before the beginning of the Christian
period’. 196

In the Book of the Watchers two journeys which Enoch had are described. Enoch’s first
journey through the Earth and Sheol is presented in 1En 17-19, where he is taken by
angels and receives visions regarding the punishment for the fallen angels. 197 As Paula
R. Gooder observes, ‘both journeys involve the revelation of the secrets of the world,
particularly the future abodes for the fallen Watchers (17-19; 21), and the souls of the
dead (22), the fire which was the luminaries of heaven (23); the seven mountains and
the tree of life which is Jerusalem (24-26).’ 198 In the Book of Similitudes (or Parables)
the final translation to heaven of Enoch is presented in relation to Elijah’s ascension 199
and as the Son of Man (a prefigurement of the Messiah). 200

192
‘Auch Henochs Himmelreise dürfte ein Midrash zu Gen. 5:22-23 („Und Henoch wanderte mit Gott“,
d.i. mit Elohim) sein, wenn man mit einigen antiken jüdischen Autoren für die Elohim die Engel liest, die
Henoch auf seiner Himmelreise begleiten.’ OEGEMA 2001: 145.
193
ISAAC, OTP 1: 5.
194
For a comprehensive list of the MSS and the different versions, see: KNIBB 1978: 1-46.
195
According to MILIK (1976: 4-88), the book consists of five fragments: The Book of the Watchers (chs.
1-36), The Book of the Similitudes (chs. 37-71), The Book of Astronomical Writings (chs. 72-82), The
Book of Dream Visions (chs. 83-90), The Book of the Epistle of Enoch (chs. 91-107).
196
ISAAC, OTP 1: 7-8.
197
Watchers is the designation given to the angels who came to earth and corrupted it (cf. 1En 17:1).
198
GOODER 2006: 39.
199
‘Cf. 2Kgs 2:11: Elijah is transported in a chariot of fire, Enoch in a chariot of spirit.’ BLACK 1985:
250. Cf. CHAIGNON 2008: 56.
30
 And it happened after this that his living name was raised up before that Son of Man and
to the Lord from among those who dwell upon the earth; it was lifted up in a wind chariot
and it disappeared from among them. From that day on, I was not counted among them.
But he placed me between two winds, between the northeast and the west, where the
201
angels took a cord to measure for me the place for the elect and righteous ones.

Black argues that a later Christian scribe probably corrupted the text and interpreted the
passage theologically. He suggests the variant ‘the name of a son of man’ instead of the
text version used by Charles and Isaac. 202 The words ‘between two winds’ probably
refers to two regions or two spirits. Another account, a detailed explanation about the
means of Enoch’s rapture, is provided in 1En 71:1, where he sees the angels in white
garments (cf. Dan 7:9; Mk 9:3; Acts 1:10) and their faces snow-white (cf. 2En 37). 203
‘Enoch’s parables, the pictures of heaven which show us the truth about the earth, are
described not only as parables, but also as a vision of wisdom.’ 204 Interestingly, Enoch’s
ascension is preceded by a period of instructions to his children of one year, as
mentioned in 1En 81:6. 205 There is no doubt about the identity of the ascended one or
that the tradition regarding Enoch’s ascent is based on the biblical account in Gen 5:
‘The one who ascends in the Book of the Watchers is the mythical figure of Enoch. The
ascent is recounted in the first person, as a personal experience of Enoch himself. The
background for Enoch is probably to be found in Gen 5:18-24, though he also appears
elsewhere. Given the mysterious nature of the account of Enoch in Genesis it is not
surprising that a tradition of ascent has been attached to him here in more detail.’ 206

The two most relevant accounts in 1 Enoch for the discussion on ascension are found in
the second revelation of the Book of Dream Visions (1En 85:2-90:42). 207 The allegorical
fable in this fragment ‘takes us from Adam, the white bull of 1En 85:3 down to the
Maccabean wars (90:9-19). Significantly the events of Genesis 3 are completely

200
Cf. BEYERLE 2005: 146-148.
201
1En 70:1-3, in ISAAC, OTP 1: 49.
202
BLACK 1985: 250.
203
1En 71:1 (ISAAC, OTP 1: 49): ‘(Thus) it happened after this that my spirit passed out of sight and
ascended into the heavens. And I saw the sons of the holy angels walking upon the flame of fire; their
garments were white – and their overcoats – and the light of their faces was like snow.’
204
BARKER 2005: 75.
205
Compare this aspect with the forty-day period of instruction before Jesus’ Ascension in Acts 1:3.
ZWIEP (2001: 339) observes that ‘the actual rapture event is being preceded by a period of final
instructions, almost as a conditio sine qua non.’
206
GOODER 2006: 46.
207
The Book of Dream Visions (1En. 83-90) consists of two revelations received by Enoch in his youth,
before his marriage and the ‘walks with God’ (1En 83:1-2). The second vision, much longer than the first
is sometimes called the Animal Apocalypse.
31
omitted’. 208 In a vision of four heavenly beings (1En 87:2-3) Enoch is once again taken
by angels into heaven.

And I lifted my eyes unto heaven and I saw a vision: And behold, there came forth from
heaven (a being) in the form of a snow-white person-one came out of that place and three
(others) with him. Those ones which had come out last seized by my hand and took me
from the generations of the earth, lifted me up into a high place, and showed me a high
tower above the earth, and the hills were firm. 209

The high place and tower signify the heavenly palace of God and his throne, where
Enoch is brought by the angelic guides to see the flood. 210 The four archangels (probably
Michael, Sariel or Uriel, Raphael and Gabriel) have human appearance, as humans have
animal. 211 Their white clothing signifies purity and represents a symbol for angelic
appearances (cf. Acts 1:10) and, perhaps, their status as heavenly priests. 212 The
following events presented are accounts of the events contemporaneous to the author of
the passage. 213 In the following narrative (1En 90:30-39) the author depicts Enoch’s
vision of the judgement day 214:

Then I saw all the sheep that had survived as well as all the animals upon the earth and the
birds of heaven falling down and worshipping those sheep, making petition to them and
obeying them in every respect. Thereafter, those three who were wearing snow-white
(clothes), the former ones who had caused me to go up, grabbed me by hand - also the
hand of that ram holding me - and I ascended; they set me down in the midst of those
sheep prior to the occurrence of this judgement. Those sheep were all snow-white, and
their wool considerably clean. 215

208
JACKSON 2004: 37; cf. also: MILIK 1976: 45. CHARLES (1912: 215) interpreted the white bull as the
figure of the Messiah. Cf. REDDISH 1995: 43
209
1En. 87:2-3, in ISAAC, OTP 1: 63-64.
210
‘The high tower in a high place from which Enoch will behold the destruction of the angels, giants and
men (87:3-4) unites into a single place the first paradisiac abode of Enoch, the heavenly palace and the
mountain throne of God.’ MILIK 1976: 43; cf. also: DAVIDSON 1992: 96-110.
211
‘As humans are represented by animals, the archangels are represented by humans. The reference is to
the seven archangels who are named and their functions described at Ch. 20, a list belonging to the
hellenistic period.’ BLACK 1985: 260.
212
NICKELSBURG 2001: 374.
213
‘From the fourth epoch of the seventy periods, which begins towards the year 200 B.C. (En. 90:6 ff.),
the writer recounts events which are contemporaneous with himself: the formation of the party of
Hasidaeans (vv. 6-7), the murder of high priest Onias in the summer of 170 B.C. (v. 8), the exploits of the
Maccabaeans, in particular of Judas, the ram with a large horn (v. 9).’ BLACK 1985: 43-44; cf also,
NICKELSBURG 2001: 374.
214
‘Of interest in this apocalypse is also the detailed picture of the end in which one finds not only the
expected punishment of the wicked and reward of the righteous, but also a new Jerusalem (90:28-33) and
a figure – a white bull – who recalls the imagery of the patriarchal period and may be a messiah, though
he is not called one (90:37-38). In fact all are transformed into white bulls in imitation of the primordial
age (90:38).’ VANDERKAM 2000: 294.
215
1En 90:30-31, in ISAAC, OTP 1: 71.
32
The ram is interpreted as being the prophet Elijah, who had been brought along with
Enoch in Paradise to witness the Last Judgement. 216 Here it can be observed to be the
first attestation of a tradition according to which both Enoch and Elijah are seen as
eschatological agents. Nickelsburg, analysing the chronological order of events,
observes that v. 31 could have been ‘transposed from its chronologically correct location
between vv. 19 and 20, or that “before the judgement took place” is a scribal gloss that
ties Enoch’s and Elijah’s return to earth to the tradition of their participation in the
judgement’. 217 Jackson concludes affirming that, ‘Enoch’s second vision completed, we
are left in no doubt but that the pattern of the Book of Watchers’ myth of the fallen
Watchers has become a paradigm exemplar by which the author’s past, present and
eschatological future may be understood.’ 218

Although many considered the Animal Apocalypse to be a militant text of pro-

Maccabean propaganda, Daniel Assefa, based on the reception analysis, demonstrated in
a recent monograph that such an assumption is false. 219

2.2.4 The Second Book of Enoch

2 Enoch, also known as Slavonic Enoch or The Secrets of Enoch is an apocalyptic

pseudepigraphon, 220 originally written in the late first century (Second-Temple
Judaism). The full text has been preserved only in Slavonic (Merilo Pravednoe) 221, but
in 2009 it was announced that some fragments of 2 Enoch in Coptic were identified. 222
The four fragments were found during the excavations by the British Egypt Exploration
Society in 1972 in Quasr Ibrim (Nubia, Egypt). The four consecutive leaves of a
parchment codex preserved in Coptic represent the short recension of the chapters 36-42
of 2 Enoch. 223 This recent discovery of great importance, the first non-Slavonic

216
Cf. BLACK 1985: 279; NICKELSBURG 2001: 405. MULDER (2003: 97) identifies Elijah with Enoch in
1En. 90:31.
217
NICKELSBURG (2001: 405) identifies two problems in v. 31: the identity of the ram (Judas Maccabeus
or Elijah), and the placement of the verse, which does not follow the chronological order of events.
218
JACKSON 2004: 39.
219
ASSEFA 2007: 328-334.
220
DEXINGER 1977: 17-18.
221
There are more than twenty Slavonic manuscripts preserved, along with other fragments of the text
from the 14th to 18th centuries. For the Slavic milieu of the translation, see: OEGEMA 2001: 154-157.
222
The announcement was made in 2009 on the Enoch Seminar website, and the discovery was presented
at the Fifth Enoch Seminar in Naples (14-18 June 2009): http://enochseminar.org/#app=86a0&bda6-
selectedIndex=5 (08/02/2010).
223
The Coptic text is not published yet and only photographic copies of the manuscript have been made.
33
manuscript, confirms the idea that the Book of 2 Enoch is a translation from a Greek
source, and predates the accepted date of the translation into Slavonic (11-12th
centuries), the Coptic text being the oldest manuscript known so far. Although the
longer recension 224 priority was recently advocated by many scholars, this Coptic
witness of the short recension 225 demands a new discussion on this matter.

Although some authors consider 2En a first-century Christian writing, 226 the majority of
scholars regard it to be originally composed by an unknown Jewish sectarian group.
‘Evidence seems to point in the direction of a Jewish background: the exaltation of
Enoch and lack of reference to any kind of saviour indicate that it is unlikely that this
text originated in purely Christian circles.’ 227 The central theme of the writing is the
ascent into heaven of the patriarch Enoch, his metamorphosis near the Throne of Glory,
and his initiation into the secrets of heaven.

In 2 Enoch 3:1-3 J (the longer recension) or 3:1 A (the shorter recension) Enoch (at the
age of 365) is taken in by two angels through the seven heavens.

₁ And it came about, when I had spoken to my sons, those men called me. And they took
me up onto their wings, and carried me up to the first heaven, and placed me on the
clouds. ₂ And, behold, they were moving. And there I perceived the air higher up, and
higher still I saw the ether. ₃ And they placed me on the first heaven. And they showed me
a vast ocean, much bigger than the earthly ocean. 228

Enoch is now carried up before the Lord by the Archangel Gabriel (21:5-6 J&A) and
sees the great throne in the seventh heaven (22:1-3 J&A). Following this, Enoch is
clothed by Michael ‘the Lord’s archistratig’ 229 (22:8-10 J&A) and is revealed ‘all the

224
Cf. SCHMIDT 1921: 307-312.
225
The four fragments from chapters 26-42 in Coptic follow the short recension and are related to
manuscript U.
226
Among others: VAILLANT 1952: viii-xiii: ‘C’est un Hénoch judéo-chrétien continuation et contre-
partie chrétienne de l'Henoch juif antérieur. Les rapports avec l'Henoch juif sont étroits’ (p. ix).
RUBINSTEIN (1962: 1-21), although disagreeing with some of VAILLANT’s arguments, supports the view
of a Christian background of 2En.
227
GOODER 2006: 70.
228
2En 3:1-3 J. The shorter recension (2En 3:1 in ANDERSEN, OTP 1: 110-111) reads: ‘And it came
about, when I had spoken to my sons, the men called me. And they took me up onto their wings, and
carried me up to the first heaven. And they put me down there.’
229
Michael is designated as ‘the Lord’s archistratig’ by the longer recension, and ‘the Lord’s greatest
archangel’ by the shorter one, adjectives derived probably from the tradition according to which Michael
is the field commander of the Army of God (cf. Dan 10:13, 21; Josh 5:13-15; 1En 40:9).
34
things of heaven and earth’ (23:1 J) for 30 days and nights. 230 He is given a thirty-day
period to live on earth and share his knowledge with his sons (ch. 36 J&A) with the
promise to return to heaven after this time ends. After this rapture experience, Enoch
needs to chill his face because he ‘could not endure the terror of the burning of the fire’
(ch. 37 J&A). 231 After his return to earth and instructions given to his sons, the passage
2 Enoch 67:1-3 J&A describes, at the end of the thirty days, the final departure of
Enoch to heaven:

And when Enoch had spoken to his people,

[the Lord] 232
sent the
gloom onto the earth, and became dark and covered the men who were standing [and
talking] with Enoch. And the angels hurried and grasped Enoch and carried him up to the
highest heaven, where the lord received him and made him stand in front of his face for
eternity. Then the darkness departed from the earth, and it became light.
And the people looked, but they could not figure out how Enoch had been taken away. 233
And they glorified God. And then they [all] went to their homes. 234

Enoch’s final rapture to heaven appears to be physical (in body), taking into account
that he instructs his sons not to seek for him (note the resemblance to Elijah’s ascension
in 2Kgs 2). 235 As Himmelfarb argues, the transformation of Enoch before the divine
throne into an angel ‘stands in the center of a group of eight early Jewish and Christian
apocalypses in which the ascent to heaven is the mode of revelation.’ 236 The text shows
resemblance to the Metratron tradition of rabbinic Merkabah and Hekhalot mysticism,
showing that 2 Enoch represents a bridge between the early apocalyptic Enochic
narratives and the later mystical traditions. 237 Adela Yarbro Collins suggests that 2

230
The Lord asks the angel Vereviel (probably archangel Uriel) to dictate to Enoch for 30 days and 30
nights 360 books (366 according to J) containing revelation about everything knowable (ch. 23 J&A).
Afterwards, God himself gives Enoch information about the creation of the world (24:2-32:2 J; 24:2-30:8
A) and its history until the flood (chs. 33-35 J&A).
231
Here the text suggests that no human can see the Lord and not be dead unless God decides otherwise.
The seeing of the Lord is compared with fire (37:1 J&A), the heat of the sun and the frost of death (37:1
J). His face is cooled down by a senior angel with snow, adapting him for the return to human company.
This episode can serve as an argument on the possibility of physical ascensions, but it must be understood
as a vision of the place where the Lord lives.
232
Found in the short recension.
233
The shorter recension reads: And the people looked, and they understood how Enoch had been taken
away. OTP 1: 195.
234
2En 67:1-3, in ANDERSEN, OTP 1: 194.
235
‘The ascent appears to be a bodily one as Enoch instructs his sons not to seek for him in his absence
and descends once again to speak to them after the ascent.’ GOODER 2006: 77; cf. CHAIGNON 2008: 59.
236
HIMMELFARB 1993: 3.
237
ORLOV 2007: 137-138
35
Enoch presents a strong interest in astronomical phenomena, and thus it is related to The
Book of the Heavenly Luminaries. 238

2.2.5 The Book of Jubilees

The pseudepigraphical Book of Jubilees 239 recounts the revelation received by Moses on
Mount Sinai, during the forty days (Exod 24:18). The writing is generally dated in the
second century B.C. 240 and composed by a Jew, probably descendant from a priestly
family, in Palestine. Several manuscripts are extant in Hebrew, Greek, Syriac, Latin and
Ethiopic; Hebrew being the original language. 241 The book of Jubilees retells the
narration found in Genesis and the first half of Exodus (from Gen 1 to Exod 24).
However, James VanderKam observed that the narration ‘... is not merely a
reproduction of Genesis-Exodus but a rewriting or retelling of them from a particular
standpoint and with definite purposes’. 242

After an introductory chapter which precedes the ‘creation narrative’ (1:1-29), Jubilees
begins with story of creation and the first humans until the birth of Abram, son of Terah
(2:1-11:13), and continues with the life of Abraham (11:14-22:30), his death and burial
(23:1-10) and an account of Jacob’s early life (24:1-29:20). The subsequent chapters
speak of the priestly role of Levi (30:1-32:34), the wars of Jacob (34:1-38:24), a
condensation of the Joseph stories (39:1-45:15), and the Moses story and the laws
concerning Passover, Jubilees and the Sabbath (46:1-50:13). The account of Enoch’s
life is found in Enoch (4:17-26) and ‘there are several features that connect Enoch and
Jacob’. 243

₂₃ And he was taken from among the children of men, and we led them to the garden of
Eden for greatness and honour. And behold, he is there writing condemnation and

238
The Book of the Heavenly Luminaries or The Astronomical Book is a pericope written in the fourth-
third century B.C. and preserved in 1 Enoch 72-82. It contains a description of the movement of heavenly
bodies and of the firmament, as revealed to Enoch during his trips to heaven. Cf. COLLINS 1996: 38-39.
239
The book is also designated as Lesser Genesis (Leptogenesis) by several Church Fathers (such as
Epiphanius, Didimus of Alexandria, Syncellus, Jerome et al.) and regarded as a Pseudepigraphon by
Roman Catholic, Orthodox and Protestant Churches. It is, however, considered canonical by the
Ethiopian Orthodox Church and known as the Book of Division. Cf. RUITEN 2000: 1-3.
240
Cf. WINTERMUTE, OTP 2: 43-44. Based on the Dead Sea Scrolls fragments of Jubilees (found in caves
1-4 and 11), VANDERKAM (1977: 283-285) suggested the period between 161 and 152 B.C. as the most
probable date of the composition.
241
CHARLES (1902: xxxi-xxxiii) argued against the idea that the original language was Aramaic and for a
Hebrew original.
242
VANDERKAM 2001: 11.
243
KVANVIG 2005: 76; cf. BERGER 1973-1999: 301.
36
 judgement of the world, and all of the evils of the children of men. ₂₄ And because of him
none of the water of the Flood came upon the whole land of Eden, for he was put there for
a sign and so that he might bear witness against all of the children of men so that he might
relate all of the deeds of the generations until the day of judgement. 244

The central theme of Jubilees is the problem of impurity. As Lutz Doering observes, ‘in
the period before Sinai, Jubilees allocates purity laws, both “ritual” and “moral”, to this
period at appropriate points in the narrative... The emphasis on purity, both forms taken
together, is considerable. Purity is mentioned for the first time shortly after the first
section of the Sabbath (Jub 3:8-14, following 2:1, 17-33).’ 245 In this context of the
discussion about purity and impurity, Enoch is presented as testifier against the
Watchers, who ‘have defiled themselves with earthly women’ (Jub 4:22), and this fall
causes the flood. 246

This account about Enoch’s life differs from the presentation in Gen 5:21-24, which is
interpreted in Jubilees. 247 ‘Enoch was with the angels (this is an interpretation of the
biblical phrase usually translated he walked with God) for 294 years (= six jubilees of
years) during which they instructed him about calendrical matters such as the dominion
of the sun.’ 248 Based on earlier traditions of Enoch, in Jubilees he is presented as a
teacher, priest and judge. 249 Enoch will live with the angels from now on, ‘separately
from the rest of humanity, recording their actions until the “day of judgement,” the
point in time between this world and the eschatological era’. 250 The text expresses the
idea that Enoch did not die, but lives in heaven and judges all of humanity. 251
According to Gene Davenport, the passage contains eschatological terms, such as: the
function of the record keeping of the men’s deeds (Jub 4:24) or Enoch’s portrayal as a
high priest (Jub 2:25-26). 252

244
Jub. 4:23-24, in WINTERMUTE, OTP 2: 62-63.
245
DOERING 2009: 274-275.
246
KVANVIG 2005: 76: ‘The acts of the Watchers constituted the paradigm for three kinds of evil that
humans should avoid: fornication, uncleanness, and injustice. These basic evils were all embedded in the
acts of the Watchers and repeated by the sinners through history.’
247
SCOTT 2005: 55-58.
248
VANDERKAM 2001: 33.
249
‘The author of Jubilees was aware of many of the early traditions which surrounded Enoch. According
to some writers, the author of Jubilees betrays the influence of several parts of 1 Enoch especially in Jub.
4:17-26.’ RUITEN 2000: 165; cf. VANDERKAM 2000: 318.
250
SEGAL 2007: 165.
251
Cf. MULDER 2003: 92-94; CHAIGNON 2008: 58.
252
‘Enoch’s sacrifices are beneficial for men on earth. To put it another way, life is not hopeless, for we
have a mediator in the heavenly realm.’ DAVENPORT 1971: 85-86.
37
2.2.6 Second Baruch

The Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch, or 2 Baruch 253, is a pseudepigraphical writing

attributed to Baruch, the scribe of the prophet Jeremiah. The entire document is
preserved only in a Syriac version of the sixth century A.D., but another text covering
chapters 3-77 is extant in Arabic 254, and some other fragments preserved in Greek are
found in the Oxyrhynchus Papyrus 403. The majority of scholars consider the book to
be a Jewish composition, the Syriac document being a translation of a Greek translation
of a Hebrew text. 255 However, Rivka Nir argues upon the provenance of the writing and
tries to demonstrate its Christian origin by analysing parallels to Second Baruch found
in biblical, non-canonical, rabbinic and patristic literature. She claims that 2Bar is a
Christian work not because it contains Christian elements, but because it does not. 256
Her hypothesis is not plausible and was challenged by many authors since its
publication. 257 In general acceptance, the composition is dated between A.D. 70 and
132, 258 probably in Palestine. 2 Baruch is concerned with the destruction of Jerusalem
by the Romans in A.D. 70 and represents a Pharisaic apologetic writing. 259 Although the
majority of critics consider the book a unity, some scholars see it as a composite work.
Because of the numerous affinities between 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra it was assumed the
253
Generally, 87 chapters or sections of 2 Baruch include the Apocalypse of Baruch (chapters 1-77) and
the Epistle of Baruch (chapters 78-87). CHARLES argues that the Epistle was not a part of the original
document and that it was incorporated in the later Syriac Bible. Cf. CHARLES 1913: 470.
254
Fred LEEMHUIS (1989: 19-26), argues that the Arabic text version might be a Christian translation.
255
Cf. REDDISH 1995: 97: ‘The work is thoroughly Jewish, showing little, if any, sign of Christian
interpolation.’ However, OEGEMA (2001: 59) stresses that it is difficult to find a Semitic origin for the
Syrian version.
256
‘The Syriac Baruch, in its extant form, is a Christian work, whose internal structure, ideas, and
tendencies may only be understood against the background of Christian theology. True, it does not
contain any obviously Christian statements, nor is the name of the Christian Messiah mentioned there
explicitly; rather it expresses its outlook in an allusive and subtle way in comparison to other
pseudepigraphic works related to it. But this fact should not mislead us, as it is precisely the absence of
explicitly Christian feature that may at times serve as the key to the identification and understanding of a
work.’ NIR 2003: 199.
257
‘It may be true that the old assumption that every text that is not clearly Christian therefore must be
Jewish can no longer maintained, but why is it any more plausible to argue with NIR that 2 Baruch, which
in her reading is not clearly a Jewish text, therefore must be Christian? NIR’s analysis is plagued with
insurmountable methodological problems.’ HENZE 2004. ‘Rivka NIR’s study displays how reception
history may become an obstacle to the reading of the Pseudepigrapha in general, and Second Baruch in
particular.’ LIED 2005: 405.
258
Daniel M. GURTNER (2008: 23-32), in a recent study on the date of composition and setting of 2Bar,
suggests the date A.D. 95.
259
‘Written by Pharisaic Jews as an apology for Judaism, and in part implicit polemic against
Christianity, it gained nevertheless a larger circulation amongst Christians than amongst Jews, and owned
its very preservation to the scholarly cares of the Church it assailed.’ CHARLES 1913: 470.
38
same authorship, but the idea was not sustained by later authors. However, Zwiep
stresses that ‘Second Baruch represents a steam of tradition that is paralleled by Fourth
Ezra.’ 260 Following Bogaert’s literary structure, 261 Gwendolyn Sayler arranges the text
into sub-units and seven blocks. 262

In the fifth section or block of 2 Baruch (2Bar 44-52) two mentions of the ascension of
Baruch are found. The first account, 2Bar 46:6c-7 represents a conversation between
Baruch and his community:

Which I before told you of; nor shall ye fall into the torment, of which I testified to you
before. But with regard to the word that I was to be taken I did not make (it) known to
them or to my son. 263

Charles argues that this represents an addition made by the final editor in order to adapt
the fragment of 2Bar 44:1, and did not belong to the original composition. Baruch
predicts to his son and to another seven elders his own death, and the people express
their concern that Baruch will leave them. The text follows the tradition of the ascension
into heaven of great heroes, suggesting a rapture story.

The second report (2Bar 48:29-31) is found in Baruch’s dialogue with the Lord (2Bar
48:2-25), which is a response to his previous prayer: 264

For this is as follows: he that is corrupted is not at all; he has both wrought iniquity so far
as he could do anything, and has not remembered My goodness, nor accepted My long-
suffering. Therefore thou shalt surely be taken up, as I before told thee. For that time shall
arise which brings affliction; for it shall come and pass by with quick vehemence, and it
shall be turbulent coming in the heat of indignation. 265

In the subsequent conversation God speaks with Baruch about ‘the final stages of the
scenario which will culminate in eschatological judgement against all nations (48:29-
41)’ 266 and receives the promise to be ascended into heaven. But before his departure he

260
ZWIEP 2001: 341.
261
BOGAERT 1969: 58-67.
262
Block 1 (chapters 1-5), block 2 (chapters 6-20), block 3 (chapters 21-30), block 4 (chapters 31-43),
block 5 (chapters 44-52), block 6 (chapters 53-76), block 7 (chapter 77). Cf. SAYLER 1984: 11-13. A
further block containing chapters 78-87, known also as the Letter (or Epistle) of Baruch to the nine and
one-half tribes is added to the Apocalypse in some editions of the Peshitta. See also MURPHY’s scheme
based on thematic lines (1985: 12), and KLIJN 1989: 4-7.
263
2Bar. 46:6c-7, in CHARLES, APOT 2: 504. REDDISH (1995: 118), in his revision of CHARLES’
translation reads: ‘But I said nothing about my being taken up, either to them or to my son.’
264
Cf. WILLETT 1989: 93-94.
265
2Bar. 48:29-31, in CHARLES, APOT 2: 506.
266
SAYLER 1984: 30.
39
must instruct the people during a forty-day period, as the angel states in 2Bar 76:1-5. 267
This rapture account must be understood in the light of the bodily ascension tradition
within Jewish history, and is not to be interpreted literally.

2.2.7 Apocalypse of Zosimus (History of the Rechabites) 268

This composite apocryphon describes ‘the journey of the monk Zosimus to the Isle of
the Blessed Ones, and his encounter with the inhabitants who claim to be the Rechabites
encountered by Jeremiah in the closing years of the Judean monarchy.’ 269 The writing in
the present form was compiled not earlier than the fifth or sixth century A.D., 270 and is
preserved in many ancient languages, the most important being the Ethiopic, the Greek
and the Syriac. 271 The original language and provenance are difficult to identify.
Knights argues that chapters 8-10 of the document (which he calls The History of the
Rechabites) are Jewish, but composed in Greek and included later in the text of the
Story of Zosimus, a Greek text. 272 ‘At this stage in our work it is best to suggest only
that sections of this document are Jewish or heavily influenced by Jewish traditions, and
that they may antedate the second century A.D.’ 273 Most probably, we are dealing with a
Christian story dependent on Jewish apocryphal literature or traditions. 274

At some point, the writing describes the paradisiacal state of the Rechabites, and depicts
with significant details the death of the body and the ascension of the soul (14:1a-

267
‘The passage is clearly styled after a Moses typology (cf. Deut 34:1-3). It is announced by an angel-
interpreter that Baruch will escape death to be “kept unto (the end) of times” (v.2), that is, he will be
physically taken up into heaven, where he will be preserved unto the end of times (i.e. the day of
judgement). At the final judgement he will stand up as a witness (13:3; cf. 25:1). As in 4 Ezra 14, a forty
day period of final instructions precedes the rapture (v.4).’ ZWIEP 2001: 341-342.
268
The story received many other titles in MSS and translations: History of the Rechabites, Apocalypse of
Zosimus; Narrative of Zosimus (or Narratio Zosimi); Testament of Zosimus; The Abode of the Blessed;
History of the Sons of Jonadab, son of Rechab.
269
KNIGHTS 1997: 53.
270
JAMES 1893: 95.
271
CHARLESWORTH 1982: 1-2.
272
KNIGHTS 1998: 81. Ronit NIKOLSKY (2002: 185) identifies chapters 8-10 (Journey of Zosimus) as an
‘early Byzantine Palestinian Christian story’, and argues that the Jeremiah traditions form the basis of this
document.
273
CHARLESWORTH, OTP 2: 445.
274
The Jewish sources of the book, although remaining unknown and hard to identify based on the extant
MSS (cf. the Rechabites in Jeremiah 35), strongly influenced the text. In my opinion, the ascension of the
souls, as described in HistRech 16:1-1a represents one of the elements preserved from an earlier Jewish
tradition (cf. Gen. 35:18-19; Ecc. 12:7).
40
16:8g). 275 The account of the ascension of the souls to heaven, 16:1-1a, 276 might be a
part of an earlier Jewish apocalyptic writing:

And while we are looking at the holy and spotless soul, the holy angels carry it away and
salute it, and thus ascends and goes up from us in glory. And after it ascends with them
and passes into the region of the power of the highest heavens, then other orders (of
angels) receive it with joy. And the archangels salute it, and afterwards they stretch it out
to it (their hands and lead it) to the thrones and dominions that are above them. And thus it
goes up and ascends until it enters (before) and worships the Lord. 277

In his introduction to the History of the Rechabites translation, Charlesworth argues that
the Syriac text is often the best witness to the most primitive text and that, based on the
Syriac Vorlage, the passage we discuss might be ‘earlier and possibly Jewish’. 278
However, we can identify a unity in the speech of the Blessed Ones (chapters 11-16),
which describes their life and death.

2.2.8 The Dead Sea Scrolls

The Dead Sea Scrolls (or Qumran Scrolls), discovered between 1947 and 1956 in
eleven caves around the settlement of Khirbet Qumran (Judaean Desert), represent circa
900 documents, including fragments from the Hebrew bible. 279

In a fragment found in cave 4 and attributed by Maurice Baillet to the War Scroll
(4Q491 frg. 11, col. I) 280 is preserved a hymn in which an anonymous narrator sits in
heaven sharing the lot of angels. The fragment was incorrectly classified and has been
shown to be of a separate composition . Four other fragments of 4QM ͪ conta ined the
hymn and were labelled 4Q471ᵇ (the Self-Glorification Hymn 281). Ester Eshel identified

275
This fragment is a part of what KNIGHTS (1998: 79) called The abode of the Blessed (chapters 11-16).
276
CHARLESWORTH (OTP 2: 444-445) claimed that chs. 3-7 and 11-16:1a represent, in fact, a Jewish
apocalypse and that chapters 2 and 16: 1b-18 are Christian additions.
277
HistRech. 16:1-1a, in CHARLESWORTH, OTP 2: 459.
278
CHARLESWORTH, OTP 2: 444. Further on, KNIGHTS (1998: 87) suggests that chapter 16 is a true Jewish
story.
279
Written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek on parchment and papyrus, the scrolls date between 200 B.C.
and A.D. 68-69 and are traditionally identified with the Essene sect. The Dead Sea Scrolls can be divided
into three groups: biblical texts, Pseudepigrapha (Enoch, Jubilees, Tobit, Sirach etc.), and sectarian
documents (Community Rule, War Scroll, Pesher on Habakkuk and Rule of the Blessing). Cf.
CHARLESWORTH 1992: xxxi-xxxv; EISENMAN; WISE 1992: 1-16.
280
BAILLET (1982: 26-29) labelled this fragment as ‘Cantique de Michel’, identifying the speaker with the
archangel Michael.
280
BAILLET (1982: 26-29) labelled this fragment as ‘Cantique de Michel’, identifying the speaker with the
archangel Michael.
281
The text is commonly recognised as The Self-Glorification Hymn. However, FLETCHER-LOUIS (2002:
199-200) designates it as Glorification Hymn, to avoid of a ‘prejudicial negative value judgement.’
41
two more witnesses to this ascension text in the Hodayot Scroll: 4QHᵃ (4Q427) 7 I, and
1QHᵃ cols. XXV-XXVI. 282 ‘The Self-Glorification Hymn is thus preserved in four
manuscripts.’ 283 Eshel also identified two recensions of the text: Recension A (4QHᵃ 7
I, 4Q471ᵇ, 1QHᵃ) and a longer Recension B (4Q491ͨ). 284 The hymn copied on 4Q471ᵇ on
the beginning of the sheet might be the first column of the manuscript: 285

₁ [... I am r]eckon[ed with the angels, my dwelling is in] the holy ₂ council.] Wh[o has
been accounted despicable like me? And who] has been oppressed like [me? And who] ₃
has been shunned [by men] like me? [And who] compares to m[e in enduring] evil? [No
teaching] ₄compares to my teaching. [For] I sit [... in heaven] ₅ Who is like me among the
angels? [Who could cut off my words? And who] ₆ could measure the [flow] of my lips?
Who [can associate with me in speech, and thus compare with my judgement? I] ₇ am the
beloved of the King, a companion of the ho[ly ones, and none can accompany me. And to
my glory] ₈ none can compare, for I [have my station with the angels and my glory with
the sons of the King. Neither] ₉ with gold <I> will crown myself, nor [with refined gold...
₁₀ [...] Sing, [O, beloved ones... 286

On the question of the narrator’s identity, Morton Smith concluded that ‘Baillet’s
attribution of the speech to Michael is useful only because it demonstrates that he has
not understood it.’ 287 Eshel, however, compared the speaker in the Self-Glorification
Hymn with the eschatological High Priest, saying that ‘the hymn was spoken in the
name of this Eschatological High Priest’, and that he resembles with ‘the figure of the
Teacher of Righteousness’, who was ‘the main influential figure in the early days of the
sect’s existence’ (cf. CD I 11). 288 Therefore the hymnist is a human being who declares
himself taken up into heaven and enthroned in the heavenly realm. 289 As Zwiep also

282
‘The state of preservation of 4Q manuscripts allows neither a reconstruction of the overall shape of the
older stage of the material nor a determination of how much of the older material has been eliminated,
and how many portions have been added in the later recension.’ FREY 1997: 309.
283
ESHEL 1999: 619. The manuscripts are dated as following: 4Q471ᵇ frgs. 1-2 to the Herodian Period ;
4Q491ͨ frgs. 1-2 to the Late Hasmonean Period; 4QHᵃ (4Q427) frg. 7 col. I and frg. 12 to the Late
Hasmonean – Early Herodian Period; 1QHᵃ col. XXIV to the Herodian Period.
284
For the text and the translation of both recensions, see: ESHEL 1996: 189-191.
285
ESHEL 1996: 191; cf. WISE, 2000: 199.
286
4Q471ᵇ frgs. 1-4, in ESHEL 1999: 620. Cf Ps 8:4-5.
287
SMITH 1992: 297.
288
ESHEL 1999: 635: ‘For the followers of the Teacher of Righteousness it was probably very difficult to
accept the scenario that such a significant figure as the Teacher of Righteousness would disappear from
the historical stage. It is possible, therefore, that some followers of the Teacher of Righteousness
identified him with an eschatological figure, to be revealed at the End of Days. The resemblance between
the Teacher of Righteousness and the Eschatological High Priest could have led some scribes to
incorporate the Hymn of Self-Glorification, which was composed in the name of the Eschatological High
Priest, into the Hodayot Scroll.’
289
In ESHEL’s opinion (1996: 195), ‘this figure does not seem to be of angelic origin, but rather a human
being who has been elevated to share the lot of the angels.’ Cf. ZIMMERMANN 1998: 300.
42
suggests, ‘texts such as 11QMelchizedek (11Q13) and the mysterious “Self-
Glorification Hymn” in the War Scroll (4Q491 frag. 11 I 13-24) have been explained
(with differing degrees of plausibility) in terms of a real apotheosis of a human
being.’ 290 Crispin Fletcher-Louis argues that ‘there is nothing in Glorification Hymn B
which itself suggests an eschatological perspective’ and, therefore, that the speaker ‘is a
priest who describes his experience of apotheosis during the liturgy of the community’s
worship’. 291

The text refers to ‘a mighty throne in the congregation of the gods’ which has been
occupied by the narrator. Michael Knibb, referring to the character of the hymn,
asserted that the missing beginning of the blessing of the high priest would have
clarified the character of the document as a whole. 292 ‘Both the Self-Glorification Hymn
and 11Q Melchizedek might represent an extreme messianic group within the Qumran
community, which saw the Community’s own leader as the messianic king and
priest.’ 293

In conclusion to the discussion on the ascension in the Old Testament and the
pseudepigraphical writings, some general lines shall be traced. The rapture traditions of
the souls received much attention in Jewish thought and led in the case of the heroic
figures to a belief that their bodies were translated into heaven. In Derek ’Erez Zuta 1.8
is mentioned that ‘there were nine who entered the Garden of Eden alive, viz.: Enoch
the son of Yered, Elijah, the Messiah, Eliezer the servant of Abraham, Hiram, king of
Tyre [probably Hiram of Tyre, cf. 1Kgs 7:13f.], Ebed-melech the Cushite, Jabeẓ the son
of R. Judah the Prince, Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, and Seraḥ the daughter of
Asher. Some say: Also R. Joshua b. Levi.’ 294 Kallah Rabbathi 3.20 mentions seven
figures who entered Paradise in their lifetime: [Seraḥ [the daughter of Asher], 295 Bithiah
the daughter of Pharaoh, 296 Hiram, king of Tyre, 297 Ebed-melech the Ethiopian, 298
Eliezer [the servant of Abraham], the grandson of Judah the Prince, Jabez and some

290
ZWIEP 2001: 336.
291
FLETCHER-LOUIS 2002: 209-215.
292
KNIBB 1999: 397.
293
KNOHL 2009: 266.
294
COHEN 1965: 570.
295
Ex 8:19.
296
1Chron 4:18.
297
1Kgs 5.
298
Jer 38:11ff.
43
add, R. Joshua b. Levi]. 299 Often, some allusions to ascensions (ecstatic visions) in the
Old Testament generated ulterior rapture traditions recorded by Jewish apocalyptic
writers.

Among the common elements of the rapture stories one can distinguish: a forty days
period of final instructions (2Bar 76:4; 4Ezra 14:23, 36, 42, 44-45; 2En 72:1; HistRech
14:1) 300, the last discourse before ascension (2Kgs 2:9-10; 2En 66: HistRech 14:1-5a),
the departure usually takes place during this last conversation (2Kgs 2:11; 2En 67:1;
HistRech 16:1), the eschatological expectation (Sir 48:10; 1En 90:31; 4Ezra 6:25-26,
14:9; 2Bar 48:29-41; Jub 4:23-24), and the prayer of the community to God (2En 68:5;
HistRech 17:1). 301 The ascended ones do not taste death, and are taken from among the
humans into heaven usually by angels of God (1En 87:2; 90:31; 2En 3:1; HistRech
16:1; 4Q471ᵇ 1). Zwiep observes that ‘when the rapture itself is reported, free use is
made of standard rapture motives (mountain, chariot, clouds, etc.) and terminology’ 302.
The condition of the ascended one is of a temporary departure into heaven, until the
final Judgement day. The ascension traditions of the Jewish texts present the premises
for a further analysis of the Ascension of Jesus. 303

299
COHEN 1965: 460-461. The explanation for their rapture is given in at the end of the 3rd chapter (461-
462).
300
Or 30 days in the case of 2En. 36:1f.
301
A conspicuous resemblance with the Ascension narrative in Acts 1:1-11 can be observed. After forty
days (Acts 1:3) and the final instructions given to the apostles (Acts 1:4-8), Jesus ascended into heaven on
a cloud (Acts 1:9). The apostles receive the prophecy of Christ’s return from the two angels (Acts 1:10-
11), and after returning to Jerusalem, they devoted themselves to prayer (Acts 1:14).
302
ZWIEP 1997: 78.
303
The New Testament authors and the Fathers of the early Christian Church interpreted the Jewish
ascensions (Enoch, Elijah) as prefigurements of the Messiah’s Ascension and His sitting at the right hand
of the Father. The previously analysed texts shall be compared with the New Testament narratives of the
Ascension of Jesus in the subsequent chapter.
44
 CHAPTER 3: THE ASCENSION NARRATIVES IN LUKE-ACTS

The Ascension of Christ into heaven is presented twice by Luke, at the end of his gospel
and in the introduction of the Acts of the Apostles. It is commonly accepted by the
biblical scholars that the two accounts of the ascension are an integral part of Luke-Acts
and not a latter interpolation. In the present chapter I shall present these two Ascension
narratives by analysing them separately. A translation, text-critical analysis and
interpretation will be included in the first two sections. The similarities and differences
between the two narratives (Lk 24:50-53; Acts 1:9-11) are due to the specific literary
function of each account 304 and will be analysed in the last section of this chapter.

3.1 The Ascension in the Gospel according to Luke (24:50-53)

The text analysed in this section depicts the subsequent events to the resurrection, i.e.
the Ascension into heaven and the ending of the third gospel. Generally, the text seems
not to put serious problems at the first sight, but the Ascension episode is one of great
importance, and its correct interpretation substantiates the Christian dogma of the bodily
Ascension. The author’s account will continue in the book of Acts, which completes in
a great way the events presented in this section (cf. Acts 1:2-14). The majority of
commentators designate this fragment ‘The Ascension of Jesus’, marking it as a section
of the main theme of chapter 24, ‘Christ’s resurrection and post-resurrection
appearances’ or ‘From resurrection to Ascension.’ The delimitation is understood
through the structure of the text itself and through the transition from direct speech
(between Christ and the apostles, vv. 48-49) to the narrative speech, which begins with
v. 50 and continues until the end. The section is considered unitary by the majority of
the NT editions and biblical commentators. 305

The structure of the chapter 24 of Luke’s Gospel reveals a tripartite plan: the empty
tomb (vv. 1-12); the apostles Luke and Cleopas on the Emmaus road (vv. 13-35); and
304
PARSONS 1987: 191-198.
305
See: FITZMYER 1998: 265-266; BARTON; MUDDIMAN 2001: 958; MARSHALL 1978: 907-911; BURTON
1900: 344; ENSLIN 1928: 60-73; HARPER; GOODSPEED 1890: 355-360; TENNEY 1986: 158.
45
the last appearance of Christ to the apostolic group (vv. 36-53). 306 In turn, the last
section may be divided into three scenes: a narrative of the appearance or recognition
scene (vv. 36-43); the words of the paschal instruction or a pedagogical scene (vv. 44-
49); and the Ascension or a departure scene (vv. 50-53). Analysing the form of the last
scene we may identify a further structure: a narrative passage or a story (vv. 36-43);
Christ’s speech or discourse (vv. 44-49); and a narrative (vv. 50-53). 307 The structure of
the passage is parallel and not concentric. Jesus leads the disciples towards Bethany (v.
50a) to the place of the Ascension, from which they will return to Jerusalem (v. 52).
Moreover, Christ is blessing them (v. 50b - εὐλογία), and, in return, the apostles will
bless God in the temple (v. 53 - εὐλογοῦντες τὸν θεόν). The Ascension is the element
that unites this structure of the passage (v. 51). 308 The preparing of the Ascension
episode is obvious through the words Christ addressed to his disciples, in the form of
the promise to send the Spirit ‘from on high’ (vv. 48-49). There are no difficulties in
reconstructing the logical unity of the text.

From the perspective of the form-critical structure the description of the Ascension
follows the OT pattern of departure stories (or final scenes). The final scene of the
gospel ‘contains the blessing (24:50-51), the departure (24:51), the response of the
witnesses (24:52b), and the act of obedience (24:52a; cf. 24:49). 309 In Luke 24:50-53,
the apostles follow their Master along the road to Bethany; Christ blesses them and
bodily ascends into heaven. After these moments, the apostles return to Jerusalem and
are filled with spiritual joy and bless God in the temple.

From the thematic point of view, the section may be divided in two parts: the Ascension
into heaven (24:50-51) and the apostles in the temple (24:52-53). 310 This structure is
based on the ideas presented by the author, the Ascension events and the subsequent
apostles’ actions, the return to Jerusalem and the praying in the temple.

306
LOHFINK 1971: 147; DILLON 1978: 16-226; ZWIEP 1997: 86; LEE 1999: 198-199.
307
LOHFINK 1971: 147-148: ‘Eine für uns entscheidende Frage ist nun, ob Teil C [vv. 50-53] mit den
Teilen A [vv. 36-43] und B [vv. 44-49] traditionsgeschichtlich zusammengehört oder ob die Verbindung
erst durch Lukas hergestellt wurde.’
308
BOVON 2009: 606.
309
PARSONS 1987: 56.
310
Cf. MIHOC; MIHOC; MIHOC 2001: 144.
46
 Ἐξήγαγεν δὲ αὐτοὺς [ἔξω] ἕως πρὸς 50 Then he led them out as far as
Βηθανίαν, καὶ ἐπάρας τὰς χεῖρας αὐτοῦ Bethany, and he raised his hands and
εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς. blessed them.

The Ascension scene is tied to the previous verses through the copulative δὲ. 311 After a
final discourse which contains the last instructions (vv. 44-49), Christ leads the eleven
apostles as far as to the vicinity of Bethany. 312 Two of problems raised by the text are
related to the Lukan framework (Rahmen): the location (Bethany or the Mount of
Olives) and the time of the Ascension (on the day of resurrection or forty days later).

Regarding the place where the events described in vv. 50-51 took place, it is certain that
this is outside Jerusalem. Bethany (el-̒Azaryeh), the village of Martha, her sister Mary,
and Lazarus (John 11:1), and also of Simon the leper (Matt 26:6), was situated on the
eastern slope of the Mount of Olives. 313 In John 11:18 is specified to be located at a
distance of approximately 15 stadia from Jerusalem (approx. 2,775 km). 314 Zwiep
considers that Luke situated Bethany on the Mount of Olives and in the vicinity of
Jerusalem. 315 In Acts 1, the author mentions the Mount of Olives as the place of the
Ascension, and this does not contradict the description in Luke 24. 316 ‘While the Mount
of Olives location could be symbolic (see Matt 28:16; Mark 13:3; cf. 1Sam 15:30, 32;
Ezek 11:23; Zech 14:4), the (near) Bethany location would seem to require some basis
in tradition.’ 317 In the same direction, François Bovon identifies here an OT tradition
which links the coming of the Lord to the Mount of Olives. 318 Furthermore, Kosanke
observes that ‘this was the location from which Jesus entered Jerusalem (Lk 19:29).’ 319
Bede interprets Bethany as the ‘house of obedience’ and states that ‘just as Bethany

311
ZWIEP 1997: 89; DAVIES 1958: 48.
312
LOHFINK 1971: 166-167.
313
MAY 1976: 87, 124.
314
In Acts 1:12 the distance between the Mount of Olives and Jerusalem is specified: ‘a sabbath day's
journey away’.
315
ZWIEP 1997: 89.
316
FITZMYER 1985: 1589-1590.
317
NOLLAND 1993: 1227.
318
BOVON 2009: 615.
319
KOSANKE 1993: 67.
47
represents a Church obedient to the mandates of the Lord, so the Mount of Olives quite
fittingly represents the very person of our Lord.’ 320

Regarding the time of the Ascension, in Luke 24 seems to take place on the resurrection
day, while in Acts forty days later. 321 Augustine confirms the number of forty days after
the resurrection as the date of the Ascension. 322 Going further, it may be insinuated that
the Ascension took place during night time. 323 However, no textual evidence suggests
this. The author does not explicitly indicate the time in which the event took place.
Several hypotheses have been raised to explain the apparent contradiction in this
matter. 324 As Zwiep also affirms, the most satisfactory solution seems to be the
chronological break hypothesis. 325 The event presented by Luke is clearly different from
that of the resurrection and the hypothesis supported by some commentators, according
to which Lk 24:50-51 describes the resurrection, and not the Ascension, cannot be
sustained. 326 As Zwiep affirms, ‘the chronological framework of Lk 24 is to be regarded
as the result of Luke’s compact story-telling, by which he draws together various
elements to form a single uninterrupted story-line. The effect is that the ascension in
firmly tied to the resurrection and appearance story.’ 327 The Ascension is not described
in detail in the gospel, we are given insufficient information regarding the way in which
Christ departed, but all of these will be amplified by the description in the book of Acts
(1:9-11). 328 The functions of the two narrations are different, 329 and from theological

320
BEDE, Homilies on the Gospels II.15, in MARTIN; HURST 1991: 139.
321
ZWIEP 1997: 89.
322
Augustine, Sermon 268.4, cited by JUST 2003: 393.
323
CADBURY 1958: 249.
324
Some reject the two passages (Lk 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11) and regard them as not being authentic,
others consider them as describing two different events, and others presuppose that Luke would have
received additional information on the time of the Ascension. More and more commentators take into
consideration the possibility of a ‘chronological break in the story-line of Lk 24’, or presume that the
author has taken ‘two distinct traditions which he reworked separately, without passing judgement upon
them’. ZWIEP 1997: 90-91.
325
PLUMMER 1901: 564: ‘And while he [i.e. Sf. Luca] does not state either here or in ver. 44 that there
was any interval at all, still less does he say that there was none: there is no ἐν αὐτῇ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ (ver. 13).
Being without knowledge, or not considering the matter of importance, he says nothing about the interval.
But it is incredible that he can mean that, late at night (vv. 29, 33), Jesus led them out to Bethany, and
ascended in the dark.’
326
Among others, see: MORRIS 1988.1: 375-376.
327
ZWIEP 1997: 92.
328
SUPPOGU (2007: 119) confirms the compositional originality of the text and considers it to be lukan,
without any markan interpolation. In his opinion, the only source used by Luke is L, which he edited.
329
‘It is clear that Luke had different purposes in these overlapping accounts. The first is to find a fitting
end to his book, the Gospel. It ends as it began, with worship of God in the Temple.’ KURZ 1993: 21.
48
reasons Luke included in his gospel only a concise description of the Ascension
(refusing to provide details). 330 Subsequently, the early Christian Church took over in its
cult this unified vision about the resurrection and the Ascension, as it is presented by
Luke and John in their gospels (Lk 24:50-51; John 20:17). Observing this, Veselin
Kesich affirmed that ‘in the pre-Nicene period the Ascension of Christ was not
celebrated as a separate feast, but rather the Church celebrated the mystery of salvation
as a whole, one mystery with several remembrances, of which the ascension was one’ 331
The apparent inaccuracies in the text of Lk 24:50-53 were interpreted by John Breck by
taking into account the theological concerns of the author. ‘In attempting to grasp the
real meaning of this celebration, we need to remind ourselves once again that the
Gospel writers were concerned less with history than with theology. They sought,
through multiple images expressed by divergent traditions, to convey the inner meaning
of Christ’s life, even if that led occasionally to inconsistencies (John and Luke offer two
differing accounts of Pentecost as well, in John 20 and Acts 2, just as Matthew and Acts
differ in their description of Judas’ death).’ 332

The words ἐξήγαγεν ... αὐτούς are interpreted by many authors as referring to an exodus
typology. 333 ‘Luke uses the verb exagein, the word used in the LXX for Yahweh leading
his people out of Egyptian bondage in the exodus.’ (Exod 3:10; 6:6-8; Lev 19:36). 334
Here Zwiep sees a possible link with the text from 2 Kings 2, which presents a
initiatory-journey motif. 335 ‘Jesus is about to complete his Exodus (see: 9:31) to his
Father.’ 336

Christ is raising his hands and blesses the audience, just like priest Simeon from Sir
50:19-23. Here it can be very clearly observed the impact of the text from Sir 50:20-23
upon the ending of the gospel; ‘so Luke suggests that Jesus is the climax and fulfilment
of Israel’s sacred history’. 337 The blessing of Christ brings to memory the blessings
from the OT: God blesses Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden (Gen 1:28), Noah and
his sons after the flood (Gen 9:1), and Abraham and his people (Gen 12:2-3). ‘This is

330
MAILE 1986: 34-35. Cf. SMITH 2006: 86-87.
331
KESICH 1982: 157.
332
BRECK 2003: 189.
333
ZWIEP 1997: 87.
334
FITZMYER 1985: 1589.
335
ZWIEP 1997: 87.
336
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
337
ZWIEP 1997: 88.
49
the only time in Luke’s Gospel where he mentions that Jesus blessed people. At the
conclusion of the liturgy of his life Jesus blesses his disciples.’ 338 Furthermore, Lohfink
suggests that the author of the third Gospel deliberately omitted the blessing of the
children recorded by Mark (10:16) in order to reserve it to the ‘final blessing’ scene. 339
In response to Lohfink’s line of reasoning, Marshall considers it ‘a precarious argument,
especially since a different action (laying on of hands) is described there. Luke’s motif
may, however, correspond with the “insuflation” in Jn 20:22; this may suggest that
some such element was present in the tradition and that Luke has expressed it in his
own way.’ 340

Analysing the description of the chapter 50 from Sirach, in v. 50 is reported rather a

blessing of a priest (Lev 9:22), than of a patriarch (Gen 48; Deut 33), or a king (1Kgs
8:54-61). 341 Analysing Justin Martyr’s understanding of Jesus’ earthly ministry, Francis
Watson rightly observed that ‘the ministry that he has obtained through his human
history is a priestly one, again in accordance with the words of the psalm: “Thou art a
priest forever after the order of Melchizedek” (Ps 110:4; Justin, Dial. 33).’ 342 By
blessing, Christ remains together with his disciples while he returns to the Father’s
bosom, this moment representing ‘the paradox of leaving and remaining, of absence and
presence’. 343 Augustine said that Christ ‘did not depart from the Father. He both came
to us and did not forsake the Father. He both took flesh in the womb and continued to
govern the universe.’ 344

Parsons links Christ’s blessing from the gospel finale with the powerlessness of the
priest Zechariah to fulfil his duties in the Temple, as described in the first chapter (Lk

338
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
339
‘An sich kann man aufgrund der drei lukanishen Belege noch nicht sagen, daß Lukas am Motiv des
Segnens besonders interessiert sei. Auffällig is aber nun folgendes: Obwohl Lukas die Szene Mk 10,13-
16 übernimmt, klammert er die am Ende der Perikope stehende Segnung der Kinder aus. Daraus folgt
jedoch nicht, daß er das Motiv des segnenden Jesus grundsätzlich vermeiden will. Er beseitigt es nur an
dieser Stelle, um es am Ende des Evangeliums um so klarer hervortreten zu lassen. Mk 10,16 wird
übergangen, um dem Schlußsegen Jesu eine literarisch hervorgehobene Stellung einräumen zu können.’
LOHFINK 1971: 167.
340
MARSHALL 1978: 909.
341
TORRANCE 1998: 112-115; cf. LEE 1999: 237-238.
342
WATSON 1997: 321.
343
BOVON, Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Lk 19,28-24,53), p. 617.
344
AUGUSTINE, Sermon 242.6, in JUST 2003: 392.
50
1:8-22). 345 In contrast with Zechariah who cannot bless the crowds waiting in front of
the temple, Christ completes what Zechariah could not do, blessing the people of
God. 346 In the same way as in the Emmaus narrative with the two disciples (Lk 24:31),
Jesus will make himself invisible one more time (Lk 24:50). 347

καὶ ἐγένετο ἐν τῷ εὐλογεῖν αὐτὸν αὐτοὺς 51 And it came about that while he
διέστη ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν καὶ ἀνεφέρετο εἰς τὸν blessed them, he left them and was taken
οὐρανόν. up to heaven.

During the act of blessing, which is mentioned in v. 51 for the second time, the Lord
departs from the midst of his apostles, ascending into heaven. 348 The words καὶ ἐγένετο
ἐν τῷ used by Luke at the beginning of the description in v. 51 represent a sign, drawing
attention to the fact that an important event is happening. 349 The passive form of the
verb ἀναφέρω (the divine passive 350) suggests rapture and a gradual ascension.
ἀνεφέρετο translates as to carry or bring up. 351 In the context v. 51 with reference to the
departure of Christ into heaven, the verb translates as to ascend. 352 In biblical Greek, the
term is used for whatever is lifted up (physical or metaphorical). 353 As Marshall
observes, ‘the choice of ἀναφέρω is unusual, and unlikely to be due to a copyist at the
time when ἀναλαμβάνω had become the established term for the ascension.’ 354 The
word (under different forms) is also used three times in the gospel 355 and in Acts, five
times 356, but with the meaning from Lk 24:51 we find it only five times in Luke’s

345
‘Le ministère de Zacharie était une liturgie inachevée. À la fin de l’évangile, un prêtre achève son
sacrifice par une bénédiction véritable. La liturgie est ici menée à son achèvement.’ CHAIGNON 2008: 81.
346
PARSONS 1987: 74.
347
TILBORG; COUNET 2000: 103.
348
ZWIEP 1997: 92: ‘Jesus departed from them by suddenly vanishing from the scene (cf. Acts 12:10). It
is only in the interpretive words καὶ ἀνεφέρετο εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν – an explanatory comment from behind
the scenes as it were – that the act of withdrawal is interpreted as an ascension, or better, given the
passive, as a rapture (Entrückung).’
349
BOVON 2009: 617-618: ‘Die für Lukas bezeichnende Wendung καὶ ἐγένετο, »da gesachah es«, gefolgt
von ἐν τῷ und einem Infinitiv, dient als Markzeichnen: Ein wichtiges Ereignis wird eintreffen. Zwei
Verben werden es beschreiben. Das erste bezeichnet die Distanz, die zwischen »ihm« und »ihnen«
eintritt, das zweite die Enthebung in den Himmel.’
350
‘The passive expresses divine action. This is a standard feature of Hellenistic and Jewish rapture
stories.’ ZWIEP 1997: 92.
351
Cf. THAYER 1889: 43.
352
BAUER 1988: 124-125.
353
SPIQ 1979: 212.
354
MARSHALL 1978: 909.
355
Lk 14:11; 16:15b; 18:14b.
356
Acts 1:2; 1:9; 1:11b; 2:33a; 5:31a.
51
writings (Lk 24:51; Acts 1:2, 9, 11; 5:31). The term is also used in the same sense in
John (12:31: ‘and I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself’)
and Mark (16:19: ‘So then the Lord Jesus, after he had spoken to them, was taken up
into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God’). 357 The terms used to describe the
Ascension of Jesus Christ in Luke-Acts are: ἀνάλημψις (Lk 9:51), ἀναφέρω (Lk 24:51),
ἀναλαμβάνω (Acts 1:2, 22), ἐπαίρω (Acts 1:9), πορεύομαι (Acts 1:10), δέχομαι (Acts
3:21). 358 Furthermore, the verb διΐστημι which is used for departure is used only by
Luke in the NT (Lk 22:59; Acts 27:28). 359

The phrase καὶ ἀνεφέρετο εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν does not appear in some MSS, but the
authenticity of the ‘longer text’ was confirmed by the editorial board of the NA27 critical
edition, the shorter text being probably edited by a copyist who considered the
description of the Ascension twice redundant. 360 Werner Georg Kümmel argues against
the hypothesis according to which the phrase represents an interpolation by a latter
author (at the separation of the Gospel from Acts), and considers it untenable. 361 Zwiep,
who argued upon this matter in response to Mikeal C. Parsons 362 and Bart D.
Ehrman, 363 confirmed the so called ‘longer text of Luke 24:51’ as original, and thus,
that it ‘explicitly refers to the Ascension of Jesus’. 364

Although roughly mentioned, the whole narrative beginning with Lk 9:51 points to this
departure of Christ. 365 Jesus is presented in typological relationship with Elijah 366 or
Moses, 367 the two eschatological figures recorded as present at the Transfiguration (Lk

357
The dictionaries generally present three meanings of the term ἀναφέρω: 1. the basic meaning, principal
(to lift up, to ascend); 2. leading somebody on high, to take somebody away (Mark 9: 2; Lk 24:51); 3. as
a term which describes the offering of a sacrifice. Cf. MIRCEA 1995: 250; NEWMAN 1971: 13.
358
For a comprehensive list of words which describe the Ascension in the NT, see: METZGER 1969: 120-
121.
359
BDAG: 195 §1; BAUER; ALAND; ALAND, 1988: 393, §1.
360
METZGER 1994: 162-163; FITZMYER 1985: 1590.
361
KÜMMEL 1975: 157.
362
PARSONS 1986: 463-479.
363
EHRMAN 1993: 227-232.
364
ZWIEP 2004: 158; cf. ZWIEP 1996: 222-234.
365
NOLLAND, Luke 18:35-24:53, p. 1228.
366
Thomas L. BRODIE (1990: 72-84) compares the descriptions of the two departures and considers that
Luke used the Elijah narrative in organising the material in Lk 24:50-53; cf. JOHNSON 1991: 406.
367
JOHNSON 1991: 406: ‘It is important at this point to recall the prophetic imagery associated with Moses
and Elijah which Luke uses so consistently and flexibly. At the transfiguration, Moses and Elijah were “in
glory” with Jesus, and spoke to him about the exodos (or: departure) that he was to accomplish in
Jerusalem (9:30-31). And when Jesus “set his face” for Jerusalem to begin his prophetic journey to the
52
9:28-36). 368 Elijah and Moses are seen as the ascended ones of the OT par excellence.
Elijah’s rapture to heaven is the only one explicitly recorded in the OT and, although
Moses’ death (not rapture) is mentioned, it was widely believed that Moses was
assumed as well and even that he wrote his own death before being taken into heaven in
a demonstration of meekness and humility. 369

The whole semantic structure of the Ascension in Luke’s gospel develops around v. 51.
This moment is the key element of the entire chapter and represents the glorification of
Christ. Two simultaneous movements happen: Christ is moving away from his disciples
and is ascending into heaven. ‘The ascension is not just a departure; it is also an arrival.
The ascension may be the end of Jesus’ earthly ministry, but it is the beginning of his
heavenly reign and the precursor to the initial distribution of salvific benefits.’ 370 The
author presents the Ascension briefly in his Gospel, the focus being on the apostles and
their relationship to the risen Jesus. 371
This pericope was rightly named ‘the doxological description of the Ascension’,
because it focuses on the blessing of Christ. The narrative in Acts 1 is rather an
‘ecclesial’ interpretation of the Ascension, which leads the reader towards Luke’s
understanding of how God’s ekklēsia must generate a joyous worship and the wish to
preach the good news to the end of the earth. 372

Καὶ αὐτοὶ προσκυνήσαντες αὐτὸν 52 And they, worshipping him, returned

ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ μετὰ χαρᾶς to Jerusalem with great joy.
μεγάλης

The Ascension event is seen not as one of sadness, but joy, and as an occasion to praise
God. 373 William G. Morrice observes that ‘joy plays a large part in the Easter story. The

city, it was as “the time for his being taken up” was approaching (9:51). The narrative has prepared us for
this departure and for its prophetic significance.’ Cf. PARSONS 1987: 74-75.
368
‘It has been suggested that they represent the Law and the Prophets, or figures who have ascended into
heaven, or eschatological figures who were expected to return. Any or all of these possibilities may be
present in this extraordinarily dense passage.’ JOHNSON 1991: 155.
369
EZEKIEL THE TRAGEDIAN, Exagoge 6:5-22; cf. PHILO, Vit. Mos. 1:28, JOSEPHUS, Ant. 3.5.7, Pseudo-
Philo 32:9.
370
BOCK 1996: 1945.
371
MARSHALL 1978: 909.
372
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
373
‘Just as this is the first occasion in the gospel when the Lord “lifts his hands” in solemn priestly
blessing of his followers, it is likewise the first occasion when they can enter the relationship to him
53
women at the tomb (Mt 28:8) as well as the disciples in the upper room (Lk 24:41)
experienced this emotion when they realised the truth of the resurrection. Not only so;
but when they parted company with their risen Lord on his ascension, they returned to
the city of Jerusalem “with great joy” (Lk 24:52).’ 374 Here, after receiving the revelation
the disciples react, but their worship mentioned here is different from that of the people
described in Sir 50. 375 In v. 52 the high point of the entire gospel is reached, because it
is the first time where Luke mentions the apostles worshipping Christ (and especially in
his absence). 376 The disciples praised the ascended One in the same way in which the
Magi once did, at the nativity of Jesus (Matt 2:11). 377

In the Greek literature the term προσκύνησις is used to describe the veneration of the
deities. Zwiep observes that in comparison with the Jewish texts which allude or refer to
ascensions ‘adoration of the person taken up to heaven is an element which is absent in
the Jewish rapture traditions, for obvious reasons.’ 378 The word προσκυνω describes not
as much the spoken words as an attitude of the worshipping one. In front of a god or a
king, one is expected to react and express his praise through body language, bowing
down to the earth in a pious gesture. 379 Lohfink affirms that Luke kept the disciples’
worship until the end of his gospel, which proves that the motif represents an editorial
element of the author and an influence of a Hellenistic pattern. 380 However, his
arguments are not convincing if we take into account the parallels with Sir 50:20-22 and
consider that the evangelist was influenced by this text. The act of worshipping from Lk
24 was influenced rather by Sir 50:21 then by a conventional rapture topos.

which will become the permanent attitude of the Christian church towards its ascended Lord: solemn
adoration!’ DILLON 1978: 223-224.
374
MORRICE 1984: 72.
375
‘Doch im unterschied zu diesem Abschnitt [Sir 50] werfen sich die Jünger hier nicht vor Gott nieder,
vie das die Gläubigen tun, die den Segen eines Priesters empfangen haben, sondern – so schreibt Lukas –
vor Christus selbst: προσκυνήσαντες αὐτὸν, »nachdem sie vor ihm niedergefallen waren«. Jesus hat die
Grenze überschritten, die die Menschen von Gott trennt. Als Folge der Auferstehung kann er göttliche
Ehren empfangen.’ BOVON 2009: 619.
376
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
377
SABOURIN 1987: 386.
378
ZWIEP 1997: 93.
379
‘Im Mittleren Orient des Altertums gehörte die Proskynese auch zum Hofprotokoll des Königs von
Persien und anderer Königreiche. Das Wort gehört also zum Vokabular des Tempels und des Palastes, der
Religion und des Hofes.’ BOVON 2009: 619.
380
LOHFINK 1971:171-174.
54
The return of the apostles to Jerusalem is linked to the second chapter of the gospel, in
which the Virgin Mary and Joseph return to Jerusalem to seek Jesus (ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς
Ἱερουσαλὴμ appears only in the paschal narrative – 24:33, 52; and in the childhood
narrative – 2:45). 381 However, unlike Lk 2:24 in which Christ is found in Jerusalem, in
24:52 the apostles return to Jerusalem not to seek the ascended One, but out of
obedience. 382 Furthermore, Robert J. Karris draws attention on the circular structure of
the gospel stating that Jerusalem is both the starting place and the ending place of
Luke’s first book. 383 Furthermore, Zwiep sees a parallel between the return of the
disciples to Jerusalem and the return of Elisha after Elijah’s departure (2Kgs 2:12-
14). 384 Luke uses here the Semitic form Ἱερουσαλὴμ, alluding to Jerusalem as a
religious rather than profane centre. 385 Jerusalem is a place of great importance for
Luke, who assigns eschatological function to it in the Ascension narratives, but also a
symbolic interpretation of OT prophecies. 386

The return in the state of joy is related to the Christ’s recognition as God and to the
sight of his Ascension. ‘It is difficult to explain this “great joy” if the recognition
implied in vv. 51b, 52a is omitted, because diestē, “was parted”, would then stand
unexplained and it would mean no more that that he “vanished” from them, as in v. 31c.
So, internal reasons support the external evidence for the originality of vv. 51b, 52a in
the Lukan text.’ 387 From Bethany (or its vicinity) ‘the apostles, now filled with great
joy, go back to Jerusalem announcing to it the message of the Lord’s blessing. It is only
then that blessing is rendered back to God in the temple itself, in fulfilment of the
prophecies uttered by Zechariah (1:62), a temple priest, and Simeon (2:28). 388 Similarly,
in the same joyous tone, the Gospel according to Matthew ends: ‘and lo, I am with you
always, to the close of the age.’ 389 The Ascension, as also the birth described in the

381
STERLING 1992: 332.
382
PARSONS 1987: 75.
383
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
384
ZWIEP 1997: 93.
385
‘Der Evangelist, der, um die Hauptstadt zu nennen, manchmal die sakrale und manchmal die profane
Form braucht, wählt hier die religiöse und semitische Form Ἱερουσαλὴμ. Das konkrete Leben der Jünger
bleibt vom Glauben gekennzeichnet.’ BOVON 2009: 619.
386
‘It is impossible to miss the importance of Jerusalem and the fulfilment of the OT for Luke. All of the
major saving events of Jesus happen in Jerusalem. Luke wants to make it unmistakably clear that Jesus is
the fulfilment of Judaism and Jewish hope.’ WENHAM 2005: 91.
387
FITZMYER 1985: 1590-1591; cf. METZGER 1994: 163.
388
TARAZI 2001: 184
389
BOVON 2009: 620.
55
beginning of the gospel, is an occasion for joy. 390 Also, through the Lord’s departure the
promise of sending the Spirit can be fulfilled, which constitutes a reason for great joy
for the apostles. Leo the Great, interpreting the apostles’ joy, said: ‘It was certainly a
great and indescribable source of joy when, in the sight of the heavenly multitudes, the
nature of our human race ascended over the dignity of all heavenly creatures. It passed
the angelic orders and was raised beyond the heights of archangels. In its ascension, our
human race did not stop at any other height until this same nature was received at the
seat of the eternal Father. Our human nature, united with the divinity of the Son, was on
the throne of his glory. The ascension of Christ is our elevation.’ 391

καὶ ἦσαν διὰ παντὸς ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ 53 And (they) were continually in the
εὐλογοῦντες τὸν θεόν. temple (praising and) blessing God.
[Amen.]

In the last verse of the gospel, Luke describes the presence of the apostles in the temple,
praising God. The term ἱερῷ – neuter noun in the dative of the form ἱερόν – translates as
sanctuary, temple. 392 This word is used to designate the temple building or the temple as
place of worship. Τὸ. ἱερόν is found in the NT 61 times (9 times in Mark, 11 times in
Matthew, 14 times in Luke, 15 times in Acts, 11 times in John and only once in the
Pauline epistles). 393 In Lk 24:53 it is ἱερόν and not ναός, which denotes that fact that the
disciples and their companions were not members of the clergy. 394 The term ἱερόν is
translated by the biblical dictionaries as referring to the entire Temple complex (the
Sanhedrin, the Temple court and buildings), the Temple itself being represented by
ναός. 395 Subsequently, the words διὰ παντὸς suggest more than the mere attending at the
usual hours of prayer in the Temple, but a continuous communion with God. 396 In the
early period, for the Jerusalem Christians the Temple was a place of regular worship
and prayer (cf. Acts 22:17), but the emphasis is on the necessity of prayer rather than on
the place of worship. 397

390
MARSHALL 1985: 910.
391
LEO THE GREAT, Sermon 73.3-4, in JUST 2003: 393.
392
NEWMAN 1971: 85; THAYER 1889: 298-299.
393
BAUER 1988: 756-757. The frequency of the expression in Luke’s gospel and Acts shows the
predominancy of the sacred place of prayer theme in Lukan writings.
394
Cf. BOVON 2009: 620.
395
Cf. MIRCEA 1995: 520-522.
396
FITZMYER 1985: 1591.
397
FALK 1995: 270.
56
The Gospel action begins in the Temple (1:8) and ends in the Temple, 398 ‘which, for
Luke, is the bond of continuity between old and new.’ 399 According to Tarazi, this
Temple – seen as the place of prayer and action of the Holy Spirit in the Heavenly
Jerusalem – is located in an eschatological Jerusalem. 400 The Temple is no longer the
only possible sacred space and it is not going to be the site for sacrifice anymore, but
that of prayer, and in its premises the mission of the disciples will commence (Acts
3:12-26). 401 Furthermore, the apostles’ presence in the temple signifies also their
faithfulness and belief. 402 I. Howard Marshall stresses that ‘with the ascension the
Gospel reaches its climax. What began in the temple concludes in the temple, with
praise to God, and the path of Jesus now reaches its goal. The programme has been
established for the second volume of Luke’s work in which the church will obey the
command of the risen Jesus to take the gospel to all the nations.’ 403

From here on, the narration will be continued in Luke’s second writing, the Book of
Acts. ‘Luke underlines the heilsgeschichtliche continuity of the early Christian
community with Israel and prepares his Gentile readership for his presentation in Acts
1-5 of the Jerusalem Church as not yet emancipated from Judaism (cf. Acts 2:46-37;
3:1; 5:42).’ 404

In the Byzantine text and, implicitly, in the Orthodox translations, Luke’s Gospel ends
with a final Amen which proves the usage of the text as part of the ecclesial ritual. The
term is a liturgical interpolation and is missing from the oldest and most representative
biblical manuscripts. 405

398
JOHNSON 1991: 404; TYSON 2006: 106; PARSONS 2007: 150.
399
KARRIS NJBC 43:198: 721.
400
TARAZI 2001: 184: ‘This temple, renewed and filled with the eschatological joy brought about by the
Spirit offered in the Gospel, is the place of prayer of the heavenly Jerusalem. This is the Jerusalem to
which the Romans will be drawn by God, not the earthly one they come to destroy but the heavenly one
where they will worship him in its light. The book of Acts picks up this story where Luke leaves off, in
the renewed Jerusalem.’
401
BOVON 2009: 620; DILLON 1978: 224-225.
402
‘Moreover in Acts 1:14 Luke takes care to show that after the ascension of the Lord the mother and
brothers, along with the Twelve and the women, were still faithful, awaiting the coming of the Spirit.’
BROWN 1994: 132.
403
MARSHALL 1978: 908.
404
ZWIEP 1997: 94.
405
‘The word ἀμήν, which is absent from the earliest and best representatives of both the Alexandrian and
the Western types of text, is a liturgical addition introduced by copyists.’ METZGER 1994: 164.
57
The last verses of the Gospel present as a narrative the last moments of the Saviour’s
physical presence on Earth and the end of his mission to preach the Gospel. These
verses function as an epilogue used by Luke to shift to his second book, the Acts. The
Ascension is the central theme of this fragment and is described into more detail in the
Book of Acts. In the Gospel, the author is contented to conclude with an image of
prayer and gathering of the apostolic community. Generally, the historicity of the
Ascension event is not contested (at least in the Orthodox and Catholic traditions), yet it
is difficult to understand the event merely by means of its description in the Gospel. The
Ascension is clearly different from the Saviour’s appearances and disappearances
following the resurrection (cf. Lk 24:31); it definitely represents the end of a chapter
and the beginning of a new one. By this, it becomes obvious that Christ’s earthly
mission is concluded, while that of the apostles is about to start. As Zwiep affirms, ‘the
ascension, in other words, rounds off an era in salvation history. This closing function is
most prominent in Lk 24. In Acts 1 the perspective broadens in that the ascension opens
up a new period, the period of the Church.’ 406

On the discussion regarding the nature of the ascended body, Aristotle thought of two
different types of bodies: simple (being the four natural elements: water, earth, air and
fire) and compound. The transcendent nature of the second (the human body)
determines this movement. 407 Jesus’ body, however, cannot be regarded either as only
physical or spiritual. Pervo suggested that his ‘body was not, to be sure, subject to
ordinary limitations. It could assume different forms (Luke 24:15-16) and appear or
disappear at will (24:31, 36), but it was capable of being touched and of taking
nourishment (Luke 24:36-43; cf. Acts 1:4).’ 408 The patristic theologians understand the
Ascension as an elevation to the Heavens of Christ’s humanity and, with it, an elevation

406
ZWIEP 1997: 171.
407
‘Die einfachen Körper haben einen naturgemäßen Urspung ihrer Bewegung im eigentlichen Sinne. So
kommt es den „schweren“ Elemente Wasser und Erde zu, sich nach unten (zur Mitte hin) zu bewegen,
den „leichten“ Elementen Luft und Feuer dagegen, nach oben aufzusteigen, bis sie jeweils ihren
„natürlichen Ort“ erreicht haben. Die vier Elemente führen damit allesamt eine geradelinige Bewegung
aus, nicht etwa eine kreisförmige... Dieser erste, ewige Körper ist nach Aristoteles dort anzusiedeln, wo
die Menschen seit jeher den Ort des Göttlichen und Unsterblichen ausgemacht haben, nämlich im
Himmel... Die gemischten Körper richten sich in ihrer Bewegung nach demjenigen einfachen Körper, der
in ihrer Zusammensetzung überwiegt. So sind ihre natürlichen Orte irgendwo zwischen den natürlichen
Orten der nach unten und oben strebenden Elemente zu suchen: auf der Oberfläche der Erde oder im
himmlischen Bereich unter dem Mond.’ MARSCHLER 2003: 631-632.
408
PERVO 2009: 45.
58
of the whole restored and deified human nature (the doctrine of theōsis). 409 In his
commentary on Luke’s Gospel, Cyril of Alexandria records that Christ, ‘having blessed
them and gone ahead a little, he was carried up into heaven so that he might share the
Father’s throne even with the flesh that was united to him.’ 410 Comparatively, John
Damascene, in his explanation of Christ’s bodily Ascension, says that ‘the Ascension
from earth into heavens and his descent back are activities of a circumcised body’. 411

Dumitru Stăniloae, referring to the event of the Ascension, writes: ‘According to the
NT, Christ elevates his humanity to the fullness of power through which he acts upon
us, by means of the four successive moments: his descent into hell, his bodily
resurrection, his Ascension into heavens and his sitting at the right of the Father. The
Ascension into heaven and the sitting at the right of the Father represent the complete
pneumatisation and deification of his human body, its full comprising with the divine
infinity, its absolute elevation to the state of a transparent medium to the infinite love of
God in its action towards us. Undoubtedly, this doesn’t also imply the melting of
Christ’s body into divine infinity.’ 412 Constantin Preda wrote that ‘the novelty of the life
to which the resurrected Christ elevated the human nature he had assumed through his
Incarnation will only be manifested after his Ascension into glory.’ 413

The Ascension must be understood as a theandric action, a real act of ascension, not
only spiritually, but especially physically. 414 Through the Ascension, the Saviour’s
human nature is not absorbed by the Divine one, as argued by some Western
commentators 415; instead, human nature is deified, it is fulfilled. Referring to the
deifying effect of the Ascension, Dumitru Stăniloae said that Christ ‘proved by it [his
Ascension] that that he ascends precisely as a human being, so that he sits on the throne
as Master over everything (to the right of the Father). He ascends from the humility to
which he lowered himself. But he also elevates his own humanity, without breaking the

409
‘He was now returning to the throne of his Father’s glory with the conquered mortal nature that he had
taken. How sweet were the tears that they poured out when they were burning with lively hope and
gladness over the prospect of their own entry into the heavenly fatherland! They knew that their God and
Lord was now bringing there part of their own nature! Such a sight rightly restored them! Then they
worshipped in the place where his feet stood.’ BEDE, Homilies on the Gospels II.15, in JUST 2001: 393.
410
CYRIL OF ALEXANDRIA, Commentary on Luke 24, in JUST 2001: 392.
411
IOAN DAMASCHIN, Dogmatica, in FECIORU 1993: 147.
412
STĂNILOAE 1978: 184.
413
PREDA 2005: 64.
414
MORRIS 1988.1: 375; cf. MOULE 1956-1957: 209.
415
Cf. FITZMYER 1998: 265-295; ZWIEP 1997: 80-86.
59
bond with those he wants to make understand and live his own state, elevated to this
supreme glory of his kingdom.’ 416

The liturgical tradition of the Eastern Church is permeated by the joy and optimism of
this understanding of the Ascension. The Kontakion 417 of the Ascension emphasises the
mystical significance of the event. Through his Ascension into glory, Christ brings
together the Heavens and Earth – ‘You fulfilled God’s plan for us, / uniting things
earthly and heavenly, / and ascended in glory, Christ our God, / to the heavens you
never left. / Yet you are not far from us, / for you cry out to those who love you, / I am
with you, and no one is against you.’ 418

3.2 The Ascension in the Book of Acts (1:9-11)

In the introduction of his second book (Acts 1:1-2) Luke briefly describes the content of
his first: the incarnated Saviour’s activity until the moment of his Ascension up to
Heavens. Zwiep notes that the assertion to have included all the Saviour’s acts and
teachings (πάντων) is characteristically Lukan. 419 In v. 2 the author mentions the
Ascension as the final scene described in the Gospel.

In Acts 1:6-11 a more detailed narration of the Ascension is given. Christ gives the
apostles the final instructions (1:6-7) and, indirectly, the commandment to spread is
Gospel ‘to the end of the earth’ (ἕως ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς). He also promises to send down
the Holy Spirit, and these are his final words before the Ascension (1:8). Apart from the

416
STĂNILOAE 1991: 279.
417
Also known as kondakion, kondak or kontak, the Kontakion is a type of hymn used in the Eastern
Orthodox Churches’ liturgical cult. The first kontakion appears to be the ‘Kontakion of the Nativity’
written by Romanos the Melodist (485-555). ‘Romanos’ works are essentially long metrical homilies,
arranged in stanzaic form, set to music and designed to be presented after the scriptural readings that are
part of the morning prayers in the Eastern Church. Although specific information about the actual
performance of these works is lacking, they were presumably chanted by a cantor – perhaps the Melodist
himself – on important feasts... The poems of Romanos, are, in every sense of the words, sung sermons.’
SCHORK 1995: 6.
418
ROMANOS THE MELODIST, Kontakion of the Ascension, cited by WYBREW 2001: 87. The last phrase (‘I
am with you, and no one is against you’) is the refrain which appears after each stanza (or ikos).
419
ZWIEP 1997: 95: ‘It is quite suggestive that in comparison with his sources Luke’s presentation is more
comprehensive than that of his predecesors. Beyond Mark and Q, e.g., Luke recounts the birth, the
resurrection and the ascension of Jesus. Although, strictly speaking, none of these events can be said to be
“acts and teachings” of Jesus, they lend some weight to the suggestion that πάντων is more than only a
rhetorical device.’
60
information in Lk 24, in vv. 3-8 the author describes the events that took place during
the forty days from the resurrection to Ascension. 420 Augustine interprets that ‘it is not
meant, however, that they had eaten and drunk with him daily throughout these forty
days. For that would be contrary to John’s statement, who has interposed the space of
eight days, during which He was not seen, and makes His third appearance take place
by the sea of Tiberias. At the same time, even although he [should be supposed to have]
manifested himself to them and lived with them every day after that period, that would
not come into antagonism with anything in the narrative.’ 421

The narration in Acts 1 ends with the apparition of two men dressed in white garments
passing on to Christ’s witnesses the promise of the second coming of the ascended one.
Judging from its form, Lohfink divides the Ascension narration in two parts: the
Ascension (v. 9) and the occurrence of the Angels (v. 10-11) 422, but this is not the only
possible classification.

Pervo regards this section (1:6-11) as the first episode in the Book of Acts. ‘The first
episode in Acts is narrated from the viewpoint of the apostles. Readers are not
immediately aware that these verses constitute a distinct episode, and its location is
revealed only at its close (v. 12).’ 423 Structurally, the pericope (Acts 1:6-11) is made up
of three units, with the Ascension description in v. 9 as its centre. 424

The most obvious parallel or model of Luke’s description is Elijah’s ascension narrative
(2Kgs 2:1-14; Sir 48:9-12), because it underlines the theme of succession. 425 Another
model could be Moses who, from the author’s perspective, represents a prototype of
Christ. 426 But the fact that this description belongs to Luke is never doubted. 427 The
verses have specifically Lukan elements, as proof that this is a tradition of the
420
JERVELL 1998: 116.
421
AUGUSTINE, Harmony of the Gospels 3.25.84, NPNF 1.6: 224.
422
LOHFINK 1971: 158-159.
423
PERVO 2009: 41.
424
The structure of the entire fragment can be divided as: A (v. 7), B (v. 8), C (v. 9), A’ (v. 10a), B’ (vv.
10b-11). Cf. PERVO 2009: 41: ‘This apophthegmatic “sandwich” establishes the meaning of the ascension
and sets out the future program [sic!], which rejects both political messianism and imminent expectation
in favour of vigorous mission.’
425
PERVO 2009: 45-46.
426
‘Moses has to leave in order for Joshua to work with his prophetic spirit (Deut 34:9); Elijah had to
depart in order for Elisha to gain a double portion of his prophetic spirit (2Kgs 2:9)... There is good
reason to think that they imaginatively represent Jesus’ prophetic predecessors who ascended, Moses and
Elijah.’ JOHNSON 1992:31.
427
Cf. PESCH 1986: 72.
61
Ascension that was taken over and edited by the author. 428 Richard J. Dillon writes that
Luke took over from the early Christian communities the idea that Christ’s preaching
and earthly ministry is ‘the climax of Israel’s colourful tradition of charismatic
prophecy’. 429

Καὶ ταῦτα εἰπὼν βλεπόντων αὐτῶν 9 And saying this, while they were
ἐπήρθη καὶ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν ἀπὸ looking on, he was lifted up and he was
τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν. taken up by a cloud out of their eyes.

The description of the Ascension event starts in v. 9 and is related to the preceding
scene through the words ταῦτα εἰπὼν. The verse has a chiastic structure A-B-B’-A’:
A βλεπόντων αὐτῶν (they were looking on),
B ἐπήρθη (he was lifted up),
καὶ (and),
B’ νεφέλη ὑπέλαβεν αὐτὸν (he was taken up by a cloud),
A’ ἀπὸ τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν (out of their eyes). 430

On the basis of some manuscripts 431, J.H. Ropes argues that εἰπὼν βλεπόντων should be
omitted because the words are uselessly making the sentence more difficult. 432
Nevertheless, his argument is not strong enough and does not reflect the author’s
intention to underline the fact that the apostles saw Christ’s Ascension. 433 As in 2 Kings
2, the entire focus of the scene falls on the topic of seeing. 434 In this way, those present
at the Christ’s Ascension become ‘eye-witnesses.’ John Chrysostom makes this
comment regarding the theme of seeing: ‘Not “while they beheld” did he rise from the
dead, but “while they beheld, he was taken up.” Inasmuch, however, as the sight of their

428
‘Luke is probably writing up in his own way and to suit his own concerns a piece of traditional
material (though tradition that was neither old nor widespread, since narratives of the Ascension are not to
be found elsewhere in the NT).’ BARRETT 1994: 81; cf. MUNCK 1967: p. 7.
429
DILLON NJBC 44:17: 728.
430
ZWIEP 1997: 103.
431
Among the MSS that omit these words the most important is Codex Bezae (D). Cf. RIUS-CAMPS;
READ-HEIMERDINGER 2004: 48. Also, a list of the MSS from which the words βλεπόντων αὐτῶν are
omitted, see: BRUCE 1952: 71.
432
Cited by BARRETT 1994: 81.
433
Cf. PERVO 2009: 40.
434
‘Die Sichtbarkeit der Entrückung Jesu – und entsprechend der künftigen Parusie (vgl. schon Lk 21:27)
– ist durch die Häufung der Verben des Sehens (9: βλεπόντων; 10: ἀτενίζοντες; 11: [ἐμ]βλέποντες –
ἐθεάσασθε) und die Wendung »von ihren Augen« (v. 9) betonnt; vermutlich hat sich Lukas an
Entrückungstraditionen (vgl. 4Kön 2; Sir 48) orientiert.’ PESCH 1986: 72; cf. ZWIEP 1997: 106.
62
eyes even here was not all-sufficient; for in the resurrection they saw the end, but not
the beginning, and in the Ascension they saw the beginning, but not the end.’ 435

The interpretation of the Ascension in v. 9 through ἐπήρθη – verb, indicative aorist

passive, third person singular of ἐπαίρω – presents the image of a concrete event. The
term is translated: raise, lift up, hoist. 436 As Stempvoort underlines, ‘this realism is
typical of Luke; see Luke 24:36f. This realistic line runs on in the meaning of
ὑπολαμβάνω. The traditional translation of this verb is usually mystical: “a cloud took
him out of sight” (Moffatt); “a cloud closing beneath him hid him from their sight”
(Weymouth).’ 437 The Ascension takes place ‘as they were looking on’ and the author
emphasizes the idea that the witnesses saw the entire scene. τῶν ὀφθαλμῶν αὐτῶν is a
metonymy replacing the words ‘their eyes’. 438

Parsons makes a comparison between the terminology of different ascensions in Greek,

Roman and Jewish literature, and the one used in Acts 1, and concludes, writing that:
‘The ascension of Jesus in Acts more closely resembles the Greco-Roman literature in
terms of characteristic features – clouds, angels, and mountains seem to play a more
significant role in the pagan texts than in the Jewish literature. The Lukan terminology,
on the other hand, is much closer to the Jewish literature, particularly the Elijah
texts.’ 439 In his commentary to the Book of Acts, David J. Williams states that ‘because
the Jews thought of heaven as above and the earth as below, the movement of Jesus
from the visible to the invisible world is expressed in terms of his going up.’ 440 Still,
this interpretation is limited and does not express St Luke’s intention and the theological
meaning of the Ascension event.

The cloud theme has several meanings; it has been interpreted as a natural cloud by
naturalists, as a cloud of Divine presence, 441 while others link this passage to the clouds
of Christ’s Second Coming (Dan 7:13). 442 Jacob Jervell understands the cloud as vehicle

435
JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on Acts 2, NPNF 1.11: 13.
436
Cf. NEWMAN 1971: 65; THAYER 1889: 227-228.
437
STEMPVOORT 1959: 37.
438
CULY; PARSONS 2003: 9-10.
439
PARSONS 1987: 140.
440
WILLIAMS 1990: 24.
441
PESCH 1986: 73.
442
PERVO 2009: 46 n. 47; cf. ZWIEP 1997: 105.
63
of the Ascension, yet without rejecting the possibility of a theophany. 443 Stempvoort
notes that both the Greeks and the Jews interpreted the presence of a cloud as indication
of a ‘supernatural rapture,’ 444 and for Sabin Verzan the cloud is a symbol of the Divine
presence. ‘The cloud is part of both the OT (Exod 13:22) and the NT (Lk 9:34-35)
theophanies. It will also be a feature of the second coming of the Son of Man (Matt
24:30; cf. I Thess 4:17; Rev. 1:7; etc.).’ 445 Zwiep explains what must be understood by
the idea that the cloud expresses a theophany, writing that such an interpretation is
‘clearly not that the ascending Jesus was deified! Rather God manifested his special
presence at the ascension of Jesus.’ 446 Referring to the presence of the cloud in the
description of the Ascension, Lohfink argues that it has a double function, both as an
epiphany cloud (through which God makes visible His presence), and as an Ascension
cloud (as a vehicle for Christ’s return to the Father), drawing a comparison with the
cloud of the Transfiguration scene, in the presence of Moses and Elijah. 447 On the other
hand, Joseph Rius-Camps and Jenny Read-Heimerdinger, in their analyses of the text of
Codex D, consider that the function of the cloud in the Ascension scene is to separate
the divine kingdom from the earthly world. 448 This is how the Christian poet Arator
understands the presence of the cloud: ‘in his honour as he comes, a star does service as
a soldier, going before the Magi; a cloud waits upon him in obedience as he goes.’ 449,
while Bede writes that ‘everywhere creation offers obedient service to its Creator. The
stars indicated his birth; clouds overshadowed him in his suffering, received him in his
ascension, and they will accompany him when he returns for the judgement.’ 450

The Ascension was probably witnessed only by the eleven apostles, as the author gives
no indication regarding the presence of anyone else. 451 Nevertheless, in Church
Tradition, confirmed by iconography, apart from the apostles, the Ascension was also

443
JERVELL 1998: 116-117.
444
STEMPVOORT 1959: 38.
445
VERZAN 1994: 32. In a similar way, John Chrysostom sees the cloud as a symbol of heaven and divine
power. CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on Acts, NPNF 1.11: 13.
446
ZWIEP 1997: 105.
447
LOHFINK 1971: 191.
448
RIUS-CAMPS; READ-HEIMERDINGER 2004: 89.
449
ARATOR, De Actibus Apostolorum 1, in SCHRADER 1987: 26.
450
BEDE, Commentary on Acts 1:9b, cited by MARTIN 2006: 11.
451
‘At the act of the Ascension, a glorification act, an act of the royal power of the Lord, only the apostles
were present’ VERZAN 1994: 32.
64
witnessed by Mary, the mother of God, 452 and Parsons opines that ‘the disciples seem to
include a larger group than just the apostles.’ 453

καὶ ὡς ἀτενίζοντες ἦσαν εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν 10 And while they were looking, while
πορευομένου αὐτοῦ, καὶ ἰδοὺ ἄνδρες δύο He was going to the sky, behold, two
παρειστήκεισαν αὐτοῖς ἐν ἐσθήσεσι men stood beside them in white
λευκαῖς, garments,

And while the witnesses look at Christ ascending, two angels suddenly appear by the
apostles. 454 The periphrastic construction ἀτενίζοντες ἦσαν, present in classical Greek
literature, is used here with the same meaning and F.F. Bruce observes that the
frequency of the notion of ἀτενίζω in Lukan writings may explain its use based on the
medical literature. 455 Luke gets the readers’ attention using the word ἰδοὺ and then goes
on by introducing a surprise element. 456 καὶ ἰδοὺ seems to be taken from LXX and does
not represent a translation from a Semitic source. 457

The apparition of the two men clothed in white, interpreted as two angels, parallels the
apparition of the two angels who showed themselves to the myrrh-bearing women at
Christ’s tomb, bringing them the joy of the resurrection (Lk 24:4). The colour of their
clothes (ἐσθήσεσι) is, according to Barrett, the author’s indication regarding the identity
of the two. 458 Pervo sees in the angels theme a linking element between the resurrection
and the Ascension used by Luke in order to express the unity of the two events. 459
Without any doubt, by using the scene of the angels’ apparition, the author also had the
intention to include one more supernatural element in his description, as a reference to
the Kingdom of God.

Jean Danielou writes that ‘if the mystery of the Nativity inaugurates the work of Christ,
that of the Ascension completes it. Just as the angels were entrusted with the secrets of
the first, they are the open admirers of the second, after having assisted Christ

452
WYBREW 2001: 83-84.
453
PARSONS 1987: 270 n. 25.
454
The apparition of the two angels takes place at that time, as BARRETT (1994: 82) observes: ‘The
temporal ὡς shows that ἀτενίζοντες ἦσαν is a periphrastic imperfect: As they were gazing.’
455
‘Ἀτενίζω, a favourite word of Luke, who is responsible for 12 out of its 14 NT occurrences, “is used
by the medical writers to denote a peculiar fixed look”.’ BRUCE 1952: 71.
456
Cf. CULY; PARSONS 2003: 10.
457
BARRETT 1994: 82; cf. BRUCE 1952: 71.
458
cf. 2Macc 11:8; Mark 9:3; 16:5; Jn 20:12; Hermas, Vis. 2:1; 3:5; Sim. 8.2.3. BARRETT 1994: 83.
459
PERVO 2009: 46.
65
throughout the interval which separated these two events, from the temptation to the
resurrection.’ 460 Although in Acts 1 it is only the presence of the Angels that is
mentioned, Orthodox Tradition visually represents them in its iconography as joining
Christ in his Ascension to Heaven. 461 This image of the presence and mission of the
angels is to be found in popular (apocryphal) Christian writings, like the Ascension of
Isaiah (3:15) or the Gospel of Peter (40-43). In his commentary on the Psalms,
Eusebius of Caesarea described the Ascension as follows: ‘the Virtues of heaven seeing
Him begin to rise, surrounded Him to form His escort, proclaiming His Ascension as
they cried, “Rise up, gates everlasting, and the King of Glory will enter”. These things
were accomplished in what the Acts record for us...’ 462 Psalm 24, which is quoted here
by Eusebius, together with Psalm 110, seems to have been traditionally used in
reference to the event of the Ascension. 463 The tradition of such an interpretation of
Psalm 24, as referring to the Ascension, is already attested from the apostolic period. 464

The cloud and the two men are elements also present in the scene of the Transfiguration
(Lk 9:30; Mark 9:4, 7) when the two men are identified with Moses and Elijah. 465 Just
as Zwiep writes, ‘they are angeli interpretes (cf. Acts 10:30, 1 En 19:1; 22:3; 23:4; Rev
10:9; 19:9-10; 22:8; cf. 1 Thess 4:17), rather than Moses and Elijah (if they were in the
view, Luke would probably have given their names, as he did in Lk 9:30).’ 466 The same
idea is also backed by Jaroslav Pelikan in his commentary to the Book of Acts, making
a comparison with the two angels who appear at the scene of the empty Tomb in Lk
24:4. 467 Despite this, based on the descriptions in Lk 9:30 and 24:4, Rius-Camps and
Read-Heimerdinger argue that by the ‘two men in white robes’ Luke described the two

460
DANIELOU 1957: 34.
461
OUSPENSKY; LOSSKY 1982: 194-199. SABBE (1991: 168-169) observes that the iconographical
tradition of the Ascension is inspired by the figure of Moses on Mount Sinai.
462
EUSEBIUS OF CAESAREA, Comentary on Psalms 17, cited by DANIELOU 1957: 35.
463
JUSTIN MARTYR, in his Dialogues 36.5 (in FALLS 2003: 57), writes that ‘when our Christ arose from
the dead and ascended into heaven, the heavenly princes chosen by God were ordered to open the gates of
heaven that the King of Glory might enter, and, after arising, sit at the right hand of the Father until he
makes his enemies his footstool (as it is stated in another psalm [Ps 110.1]).
464
DANIELOU 1957: 39: ‘But Justin is the first to develop the dialogue between the angels of heaven who
do not recognise the Word made Flesh and the angels of earth who reveal His identity.’
465
Cf. DILLON NJBC 44:17: 728.
466
ZWIEP 1997: 106. JOHNSON (1992: 31) does not exclude the idea that by the two men Moses and Elijah
would be described.
467
PELIKAN 2005: 41.
66
central figures of the Jewish Tradition concerning the ascension, Moses and Elijah, and
not two angels. 468

Jervell sees the apparition of the angels as a necessity because the apostles, gazing to the
skies and witnessing the Ascension, were not able to understand what had happened.
This is why the angels are seen as interpreters of the scene in v. 11. 469 One can notice
the greater attention given by the author to the apostles’ expectations when compared to
the Ascension itself. 470

The Saviour’s bodily Ascension into heaven was affirmed by Luke and confirmed by
the Tradition of the Church already in the first centuries. Nevertheless, some
commentators of the Scripture believe that the Ascension is not a historical event and
that Luke’s descriptions are to be understood in connection with the pagan tradition of
raptures into the sky of the heroes of the ancient world. Thus, Rudolf Pesch argues that,
as far as Luke’s description is concerned, although it involves the event of Jesus’
Ascension, it cannot be considered a historical event. 471

οἳ καὶ εἶπαν· ἄνδρες Γαλιλαῖοι, τί 11 and they said: Men of Galilee, why do
ἑστήκατε [ἐμ]βλέποντες εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν; you stand looking into the sky? This
οὗτος ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὁ ἀναλημφθεὶς ἀφ᾽ ὑμῶν
Jesus who has been taken up from you
εἰς τὸν οὐρανὸν οὕτως ἐλεύσεται ὃν
τρόπον ἐθεάσασθε αὐτὸν πορευόμενον into the sky, will come in the same way
εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν. you have seen him going into the sky.

The phrase εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν is used four times in vv. 10-11; the third usage is missing
from Codex D and others, but it has been agreed that its omission happened accidentally
and does not constitute an interpolation. 472 Sleeman makes an analysis of the frequency
of this expression in the Ascension description and concludes that: ‘While not
unprecedented elsewhere in the narrative, such tight repetition functions as an important

468
RIUS-CAMPS; READ-HEIMERDINGER, The Message of Acts in Codex Bezae, 1, pp. 89-90.
469
JERVELL, Die Apostelgeschichte, p. 117.
470
RIUS-CAMPS; READ-HEIMERDINGER 2004: 89.
471
‘Insofern Lukas aber mit seiner Erzählung tatsächlich ein Geschehen an Jesus im Auge hat, meint er
dessen Erhöhung, und diese wiederum ist kein historisches Ereignis... Das sichtbare »Wunder« ist weder
ein leeres Grab noch ein wie eine Rakete zum Himmel fahrender Mensch, sondern die von Jesus gestiftete
einmütige Versammlung (1:14) selbst, in der alle, die glauben und nicht zweifeln, ihren erhöhten Herrn
»schauen«, der unsichtbar in ihrer Mitte real-präsent ist und durch seinen Geist alle miteinander
verbindet.’ PESCH 1986: 75.
472
METZGER 1994: 245.
67
way in which Luke signals spatial-theological information within Acts.’ 473 Ἄνδρες
(noun, in the vocative) is used in Acts 29 times as a formal formula to begin a
discourse 474 and is also employed in Hebrew, yet never in the vocative. 475 The disciples
are named Γαλιλαῖοι because of their origin but, according to Pervo, also in order to
geographically set the place where their mission begins. 476 Also, Galilee is an important
place in the scenes of the Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection (Lk 23:5, 49, 55; 24:6;
Acts 13:31).

The disciples were left gazing into the skies without having understood the great
mystery of the Ascension. The purpose of the angels is to explain to the disciples what
had happened and to elucidate their ambiguities regarding Christ’s second coming. 477
Bede explains that there are two reasons for the apparition of the angels, so as to soothe
the apostles and to confirm Christ’s Ascension and his coming again. 478 The words of
the angels οὗτος ὁ Ἰησοῦς are not meant to reveal the identity of the ascended one (the
disciples knew Jesus), but to attest the fact that the same one will come again at the
Parousia. 479 ‘The angelic words are then an affirmation that Jesus will come back, but
not right now. At any rate, it is clear that Luke wanted to say more than was
possible.’ 480 The question τί ἑστήκατε [ἐμ]βλέποντες εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν implies that the
waiting state of the apostles was wrong: ‘the apostles should proceed to the tasks that
have been assigned to them. This is against Cullmann’s argument that Luke believed
that only a short time would intervene between Ascension and Parousia.’ 481 Luke tries
to address the issue of waiting for an immediate return of the Saviour because the early
Christian community waited for Christ to return not after a long time. 482

The apostles witnessed Christ’s bodily Ascension, seeing him ascending from the
ground with the same body he was resurrected with. Augustine explains this idea thus:
‘How did they see him go? In the flesh which they touched, which they felt, the scars of

473
SLEEMAN 2009: 74.
474
Cf. CULY; PARSONS 2003: 11.
475
BARRETT 1994: 83.
476
PERVO 2009: 46 n. 48. JERVELL (1998: 117) considers that the author named the Apostles ‘men of
Galilee’ because they followed Christ from Galilee to Jerusalem.
477
ZWIEP 1997: 107.
478
BEDE, Commentary on Acts 1:11a, ACCS – NT 5: 11.
479
PESCH 1986:74; PERVO 2009: 46.
480
ZWIEP 1997: 107.
481
BARRETT 1994: 84.
482
JERVELL 1996: 112.
68
which they even probed by touching; in that body in which he went in and out with
them for forty days, manifesting himself to them in truth, not in any falsity; not as
apparition, not as a shadow, not as a spirit, but as he himself said, not deceiving,
“Handle and see, for a spirit does not have flesh and bones, as you see me to have”.’ 483

The author makes reference to the Parousia, a remark with a double function to confirm
to the disciples that Christ physically left (that his disappearance is final and that he will
no longer show himself to them) and to make them understand the responsibility given
to them by the Saviour himself (that of having to preach the Gospel ‘to the end of the
earth’, Acts 1:8). In order to fulfil Christ’s commandment, the disciples must first
receive the Holy Spirit. In his interpretation of this, Johnson writes that ‘we know that
they will also receive the promised Spirit. But to do so, they must obey the command to
return to the city and await that empowerment.’ 484 Lohfink understands the Ascension
as a forecast of the Parousia and, thus, the end of Jesus’ earthly existence anticipates the
end of his Church. 485 Regarding the day when the ascended Christ will return, Pelikan
notes that ‘the language of the prophets speaks of “the day of his coming” (ἡμέραν
εἰσόδου αὐτου) (Mal 3:2 LXX) in the singular, as though there were only one coming.
This has compelled the exegetes of the church to distinguish between the “first
coming”, in which the prophecy of Isaiah about the suffering servant (Isa 53) had
already been fulfilled, and the “second coming”, prior to which the prophecy of Isaiah
about the wolf and the lamb feeding together (Isa 65:25) would not be fulfilled, and to
assign the various prophecies to one or the other of these.’ 486 This passage is one of the
few in the book of Acts making reference to the Parousia (cf. 3:20 ff.; 10:42; 17:31;
23:6; 24:25). As Serge Ruzer observes, ‘the redemption is thus postponed, but not
without good reason, and in due time Jesus will return to restore the kingdom to Israel
as expected.’ 487

After this event, the apostles return to Jerusalem (cf. Lk 24:53), as reaction to the
angels’ commandment, thus completing the chiastic structure of the whole fragment.
The emphasis of the fact that the disciples saw him ascending (ἐθεάσασθε αὐτὸν
483
AUGUSTINE, Tractates on John 21.13.2-4, ACCS – NT 5: 11.
484
JOHNSON 1992: 31.
485
‘So benutzt Lukas zu Beginn seines Zweiten Buches die Perikope, mit der er die Zeit Jesu beendet
hatte, um mit ihrer Hilfe nun auch den Abschluß der Zeit der Kirche vorwegnehmend zu markieren und
auf die Parusie auszublicken: Die Himmelfahrt wird zum Bild für die Parusie.’ LOHFINK 1971: 262.
486
PELIKAN 2005: 43.
487
RUZER 2008: 174.
69
πορευόμενον εἰς τὸν οὐρανόν) once again confirms the Lukan composition of the
text. 488 Zwiep stresses that the author focuses on the visibility of the Ascension event,
and points out that ‘although this is a standard feature of rapture stories, it also reveals
Luke’s concern to authenticate the apostolic witnesses.’ 489

Verse 12 is a transitional one and can be interpreted both as a conclusion of the

preceding pericope and as the beginning of a new section. 490 In this verse we are given
the approximate location of the Ascension, the Mount of Olives, with the observation
that the distance between Jerusalem and the Mount is ‘a sabbath day’s journey away’.
This reference to the Saturday gives an indication of the proximity of this place to
Jerusalem 491 and also that they were still under the OT law. 492 The suggestion is inexact
and one definitely cannot use it to argue that the Ascension could have taken place on a
Saturday. The Parousia which is referred to in the preceding verse is connected to the
location of the Ascension, because both Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives are
mentioned as location of the Saviour’s second coming (Zech 14:4 LXX; cf. 4Bar
9:20). 493

According to Sleeman, the beginning verses not only work as introduction to the themes
subsequently developed in the Book of Acts, they also fix its spatial structure. ‘The
ascension is the moment of spatial realignment in Acts (cf. 1:1-2a), and Acts as a
narrative whole cannot be understood without ongoing reference to the heavenly
Christ... Functioning as far more than the simple setting, the geography of these verses
structures the shape of the narrative and communicates the Christocentric theology of
Acts 1, which in turn shapes expectation concerning the unfolding narrative.’ 494

488
Cf. SABBE 1991: 160.
489
ZWIEP 2004: 158.
490
However, PERVO (2009: 46) remarks that ‘Lucan style is often fluid and is thus resistant to rigid
divisions.’
491
‘The Mount of Olives (Matt 21:1; Mark 11:1; Luke 22:39) is situated less than 1 km from Jerusalem’s
walls to east. It offered a splendid view over the city and over the Temple’s esplanade. The roman road
from Jericho to Jerusalem passes through the Mount of Olives. In the times of Jesus the hill bearing that
name was covered with a dense forest of olive trees propitious for solitary retreats.’ VERZAN 1994: 32; cf.
SLEEMAN 2009: 80.
492
‘Thus, the apostles are to remember that, between the earthly Jerusalem and the Mount of Olives as the
locale of the resurrected Jesus’ epiphany lays the hurdle of “the Law”...’ TARAZI 2001: 189.
493
HENGEL 1995.2: 46-47.
494
SLEEMAN 2009: 80-81.
70
Many authors put emphasis on the centrality of the Ascension scene in Luke’s writings.
On the one hand, his Gospel ends with a short account of the episode, as the pinnacle of
the Lord’s physical presence on earth. On the other hand, the Book of Acts begins with
a long depiction of the Ascension, attesting Luke’s intention to place the Ascension
scene as the key moment of the two writings. Talbers explains saying that ‘on the one
hand, Mediterranean documents frequently, if not generally, have their key point at the
centre. This is true both for Greco-Roman and for Jewish writings. On the other hand,
Luke-Acts seems to fit into this general tendency. At least from Luke 9:51 everything in
the third gospel moves toward the ascension. Luke 24:50-53 closes the Gospel. Acts
1:9-11 opens the Acts. From Acts 1 everything moves out from the ascension.’ 495
Further on, several other similitudes between the themes in Lk 24 and Acts 1 can be
traced: Lk 24:33-34, 36 – Acts 1:3; Lk 24:36-43 – Acts 1:3; Lk 24:49 – Acts 1:4; Lk
24:47-48 – Acts 1:8b; Lk 24:51-52 – Acts 1:9, 12. 496 ‘Luke differentiates between the
resurrection and the Ascension. The resurrection conveys the fact that God revealed
himself bodily, that he revealed his Divinity in Jesus’ body. Jesus Christ ended his
earthly life ascending into heavens with his body (cf. Lk 24:50-52), “at the right hand of
the Father”, where he sits in communion with the Father (cf. Acts 2:33-34; Ps 109:1-2),
that is in a state of glory.’ 497

Strong influences on the narrative construction of the Ascension were the traditions
referring to the Prophet Elijah’s rapture. After analysing the sources of the Ascension
story, Zwiep concludes stating that ‘if we trace the comparison with Elijah a little
further, it appears that in both cases their heavenly assumption is not the end, but
inaugurates a period of temporal preservation in heaven with a view to a future
eschatological return.’ 498 Nevertheless, traditions concerning Elijah’s rapture are not the
only sources to be used by Luke (see, for instance, the comparison to Moses). In the
Graeco-Roman world of those times, speculations about raptures evolved into a
complex set of ideas.

495
TALBERT 1974: 112.
496
TALBERT 1974: 58-59.
497
PREDA 2005: 64.
498
ZWIEP 1997: 116.
71
3.3 Comparison between the Ascension accounts in Luke and Acts

Luke narrates the same ascension story twice, at the end of his gospel and in the
beginning of the Acts of the Apostles. And, as Rius-Camps and Read-Heimerdinger
rightly observe, ‘in Luke’s dense and concise style, nothing is superfluous.’499
Therefore, a comparison between the two descriptions of the Ascension is relevant and
necessary in order to fully understand the purpose and meaning of the event, as
presented by the author of Luke-Acts. Comparing the two accounts of the Ascension
(Lk 24 and Acts 1) Bock considers that ‘these texts deal with a single event, but it is
possible that Luke pictures the two departures as an inclusion bracketing Jesus’
beginning appearance and his final appearance.’500 Kurz draws attention on the fact that
‘two types of openness that remain at the end of Luke, linkage and incompletion,
prevent complete closure of the plot. Linkage ties the narrative to the next volume.’501

Comparing the two accounts of the Ascension of the Christ (Lk 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-
11) we see two different records of the same event. In the first he is only preoccupied in
briefly narrating the end of the Christ’s earthly ministry and finishing the gospel.
Through the second one, we understand the significance of Jesus’ departure as the
beginning of the Church, and that is why Luke now gives more details to the Ascension
story. The most obvious differences between Luke and Acts are the omissions (in Luke)
and the additions (in Acts), the key difference being the time of the Ascension (the
chronology). Many important new details are offered in Acts (the ascension on a cloud,
the apparition of the two angels, the account about the apostles’ mission, and the
promise of the two men that Jesus will come back in the same way he departed). Luke
omits in Acts to report the place of the ascension and also the composition of the
eyewitnesses group (the audience). We assume that more than the eleven disciples were
present and witnesses of the departure of Jesus.502

Although the two accounts describing the Ascension of Jesus were treated separately I
consider it relevant to include a comparison between them. The comparison is made in
order to understand both the differences and similarities between the two accounts and

499
RIUS-CAMPS; READ-HEIMERDINGER 2004: 62.
500
BOCK 1996: 1944.
501
KURZ 2005: 29.
502
‘Les autres personnages mentionnés au verset 14 viennent équilibrer ce que la concentration
théologique sur les Apôtres aurait d’incomplet lorsqu’il s’agit de la prière de l’Église: il y a là Marie,
mère de Jésus, d’autres femmes, et les frères de Jésus.’ CHAIGNON 2008: 92.
72
their specific role within Luke’s theology. I already discussed the unity between the two
Lukan books, emphasising that the strongest argument for this view is found in the
Ascension narratives. 503 Luke refers to his first book in the beginning of the second
stating that the story of Jesus was presented ‘until the day when he was ascended...’
(Acts 1:2). Talbert observes that ‘from what the author himself says, therefore, the
events of Luke 24 and those mentioned in parts of Acts 1 are the same.’ 504

Between the two narratives some clear repetitions or similarities can be traced: the
apostles are direct witnesses (‘eye-witnesses’) of Christ (Lk 24:48 – Acts 1:8); they are
to begin their mission from Jerusalem (Lk 24:47 – Acts 1:8); and from Jerusalem to the
end of the earth (Lk 24:47 – Acts 1:8; they are commanded to stay in Jerusalem (Lk
24:49 – Acts 1:4); until the coming of the promised Holy Spirit (Lk 24:49 – Acts 1:4);
when they will receive ‘power’ (Lk 24:49 – Acts 1:8); and after these last instructions
Jesus ascended into heaven (Lk 24:51 – Acts 1:9). Nelson P. Estrada analysing these
similarities sees an overlap of events: ‘The Ascension story in Acts does not only begin
where the Ascension story in Luke ends. Rather, what we find is an overlap of accounts
between the two. The overlap is done by the repetition or redundancy of the scenes and
phrases.’ 505

Talbert presents the five most discussed views which may explain the similarities and
differences between Ascension descriptions in Luke-Acts: the author gained more
information during the time interval between the composition of the gospel and that of
the Acts; 506 the ‘two-traditions’ hypothesis; 507 the interpolation hypothesis; 508 for
theological reasons the author presents the same event twice making use of typological
motifs; 509 the Lukan architecture of Luke-Acts. 510 He concludes by stressing that ‘any

503
ESTRADA stresses this by saying that ‘one of its strongest evidence that shows Acts to be a
continuation of the gospel is found in the ascension stories of Lk 24 and Acts 1 (Lk 24:1-43 // Acts 1:1-3;
Lk 24:44-49 // Acts 1:11).’ ESTRADA 2004: 83.
504
TALBERT 1974: 59.
505
ESTRADA 2004: 83.
506
PLUMMER 1901: 564; cf. HARNACK 1909: 157; HENGEL 1995.2: 46.
507
DAVIES 1958: 49. Cf. MOULE 1956-1957: 207; LOHFINK 1971: 161-162.
508
‘The two different accounts of the same series of events may be due to an editorial interpolation into
the original text of Luke and/or Acts made in the second century after the Gospel had been separated from
its companion volume.’ TALBERT 1974: 59.
509
PARSONS 1987: 189. Cf. DAVIES 1958: 52; STEMPVOORT 1959: 30-42; ZWIEP 1997: 115-117.
510
TALBERT 1974: 61: ‘...the correspondences between the end of Luke and the beginning of Acts are
stylistic tendency of the author and a part of the Lucan architecture. While they may also have theological
significance, the parallels most certainly reflect Lucan style.’ Cf. GOULDER 1964: 16-17.
73
explanation which thinks of Luke as a historian in the modern sense whose concern for
factual accuracy is uppermost also must be discarded. Nor is it likely that the author of
Luke-Acts can be thought of as a type of historian who would include all traditions
known to him in order to be fair. This was certainly not the way he treated Mark, for
example. In the light of modern study of the Lucan writings, that explanation is most
probable which posits the creative hand of the author. Hence, it seems likely that either
a theological or a stylistic tendency or both played a role in the inclusion of the two very
similar accounts in Luke 24 and Acts 1.’ 511 On the other hand, analysing the form,
Lohfink attempts to establish whether one or several traditions were used by the Luke-
Acts author in composing the Ascension narratives. He discusses three possibilities:
Luke used two different traditions (one with the ‘priestly blessing’ and ‘proskynesis’
motifs, and another one containing the motif of the cloud and the ‘angels’ scene); Luke
knew only one Ascension tradition (containing all the elements inserted in two separate
narratives); and the different motifs belong to a pre-Lukan tradition passed through an
editing process. 512

The most probable explanation for the different descriptions in Luke-Acts would be the
view which emphasises the theological tendencies of Luke in describing the Ascension
and the literary purpose of each of the narratives. 513 Overall ‘it is clear that Luke had
different purposes in these overlapping accounts.’ 514 Parsons analysed the narrative
strategies and the function of the pericopae within their narrative contexts by examining
the redundancy in Luke-Acts. 515 Rejecting the ‘two traditions’ hypothesis, I. Howard
Marshall considered the account in the gospel to be simply a summary of the Ascension
event presented in Acts 1. ‘Although it has been argued that Luke later received fuller
information, which he incorporated in Acts, it is more probable that he reserved the
fuller account for Acts, and was content to give a summary of it, with a particular slant,

511
TALBERT 1974: 60.
512
LOHFINK 1971: 162.
513
FRANKLIN 1975: 35: ‘Theological differences, or rather the different theological points he [i.e. Luke]
was trying to make, explain the differences between his two accounts of the ascension, for it is viewed
against either what has gone before or against what is to follow. Luke 24 sets the event in the context of
the life of Jesus, Acts 1 in that of the life of the early Church.’ Cf. DONNE 1983: 10.
514
KURZ 1993: 21.
515
PARSONS 1987: 191.
74
in the Gospel. If so, answers to the question of the sources and historicity of the present
scene are dependent upon the investigation of Acts 1:1-11.’ 516

According to Tannenhill, the redundancy (or repetitive patterns) in Luke-Acts has eight
functions, 517 as presented by Parsons: ‘(1) it combats the tendency to forget information
over a long narrative; (2) it is a means of emphasis; (3) it has a persuasive effect; (4) it
allows for character development; (5) it confirms expectations reached through the
reading process; (6) it allows changes in the pattern to be noted; (7) it provides a sense
of unity in the narrative; and (8) it encourages interaction among the characters and
events in the reading process.’ 518 In fact, when speaking of redundancy both repetition
and variation are implied. In comparing the two Ascension narratives in Luke-Acts I
must now turn to analyse these two aspects.

First, at least three repetitive elements can be observed: the characters of the story are
the same, Christ and his apostles; 519 the Ascension is seen as the last appearance of the
resurrected one to the disciples; and in both pericopae Jesus instructs his apostles in
order to become his witnesses, preaching his Gospel. Furthermore, Luke emphasises the
strong link between the Ascension and the coming of the Spirit; Jesus promised to the
apostles to send them the Holy Spirit in Lk 24:49 and Acts 1:4-5, 8. Parsons suggests
that ‘by repeating the ascension in Acts, the narrator has identified the story of Jesus
with the story of the Church.’ 520 Therefore, the repetition of the Ascension description
in Acts is supposed to transmit to the reader that the two stages in the Salvation history,
the life of the Saviour on earth and the history of the Church, cannot be separated, one
being the natural continuation of the other. 521

Secondly, the striking variations in the Ascension story in Acts raised a series of
questions regarding the purpose and function of the narrative in Luke’s thought. As
Parsons observes, ‘what is troublesome for the reader is not the similarities, but the

516
MARSHALL 1978: 908.
517
TANNENHILL 1984: 238-240.
518
PARSONS 1987: 192.
519
From tradition, at the site of the Ascension, apart from the disciples at least the mother of Christ,
Mary, was present. However, Luke does not include any information regarding this and he even wants to
transmit that only the eleven were present. PARSONS (1987: 270 n.25) argues that ‘the disciples seem to
include a larger group than just the apostles’.
520
PARSONS 1987: 192.
521
SLEEMAN 2009:74-75.
75
dissimilarities between the two accounts’. 522 More elements of variation than repetition
can be found between the two narratives. In Estrada’s view, ‘the variation, more than
the repetition and redundancy of the ascension story in Acts 1 helps to show the motif
of separation by the apostles from Jesus.’ 523

One of the most discussed contradictions in Luke-Acts is the chronological status of the
Ascension. Although no timeframe is given, the Ascension in Lk 24 seems to be on the
same day with the Resurrection (on the evening of Easter Sunday; vv. 13, 36, 50),
whereas in Acts 1:2 the author mentions forty days after the resurrection as the exact
time of Christ’s departure. During those forty days Jesus appeared to his apostles and
instructed them; all these elements are also recorded in the gospel’s ending but,
apparently, in a much contracted time span. ‘Although the time factor in Lk 24
constitutes a problem, since it appears that all events described there take place on the
same day, the schematization concluding with the Ascension remains the same. Thus in
the contexts of Acts 1:9-11 and Lk 24:50-53 (“Mk” 16:19-20 is not a separate witness
here) the Ascension comes as the final appearance story, as it were.’ 524 As I noted
before, the most probable explanation for this conflict is the chronological break
hypothesis. If this is so, than between vv. 44-53 or 50-53 the recorded events take place
after the Resurrection Sunday, over an indefinite period of time. Supporting this
hypothesis and deciding for the break after v. 49, Marshall noted that ‘the teaching
given by Jesus follows on directly from the recognition scene and also leads on directly
to the departure scene. The whole series is thus placed on Easter Sunday evening,
although in Acts 1 Luke puts the departure forty days after the resurrection. Unless
Luke altered his chronology between the composition of the Gospel and the Acts (which
is improbable in view of the unified character of Lk-Acts), he has consciously
telescoped his story at some point.’ 525 In my opinion, a break in the chronological
framework after the scene of the appearance to the disciples in Jerusalem (Lk 24:36-43)
is most probable. 526 Parsons explains the historical inconsistency by means of literary
functions: ‘Momentarily suspending those historical concerns, the temporal discrepancy

522
PARSONS 1987: 193.
523
ESTRADA 2004: 92.
524
ALSUP 1975: 145.
525
MARSHALL 1978: 904; cf. MARSH; MOYISE 2006: 39-40.
526
PLUMMER (1901: 564) suggested the possibility of several breaks in the chronology, probably after v.
43 and also after v. 49.
76
is readily explained on literary grounds.’ 527 Therefore, he writes, ‘if the narrator is
attempting in the closing scene to educate his readers concerning the relationship
between the crucifixion and exaltation, then a close-up scenic ending is the most
appropriate to use... Forty days of appearances in Acts, on the other hand, is entirely
appropriate in its narrative context. Establishing the disciples as reliable and legitimate
successors of Jesus is a major task of the opening narrative in Acts.’ 528

Another apparent incongruity between the two accounts is the locale of the Ascension.
The location mentioned in the gospel, Bethany, seems to be in disagreement with the
one presented in Acts (Mount of Olives). In fact, both the vicinity of Bethany (Lk
24:50) and the Mount of Olives (Acts 1:12) describe the same place. 529 Marshall notes
that ‘there is no obvious reason for the alteration. The two places [Bethany and the
Mount of Olives] were regarded as close together (Lk 19:29 par. Mk 11:1), Bethany
lying on the E slope of the mountain.’ 530 Therefore, as I argued before the apparent
contradiction serves the purposes of Luke’s theology. 531

Five other less important differences between the Luke-Acts Ascension narratives can
be identified: the disciples return to Jerusalem but with different purposes and different
specific destinations; 532 the account in Lk is recorded in structure of narration without
dialogue, whereas in Acts in conversational form - questions and answers (Acts 1:6-8,
11); 533 no reference to blessings (of any kind) is made in Acts, whereas in Luke the

527
PARSONS 1987: 193. Cf. ESTRADA 2004: 93.
528
PARSONS 1987: 194.
529
DILLON (1978: 224) notes that ‘the locale of this ascension-scene is reconciled without difficulty with
that of Acts 1:12, once it is recalled that Bethany and the Mount of Olives were associated by the
evangelist in his tracing of the Master’s itinerary to Jerusalem (Lk 19:29),’ and that Luke, ‘in typical
fashion, uses complementary rather than repetitive data from a source to locate two versions of the same
event.’
530
MARSHALL 1978: 908. In the same way BOCK (1996: 1944) demonstrates that the two locales overlap,
Bethany being on the eastern side of the Mount of Olives.
531
Cf. PARSONS 1987: 193-194. Also, CHAIGNON sees in the mention of Mount of Olives a link to the
prophetic resonance. ‘Ce lieu a, sous la plume de Luc, une résonance prophétique: c’est sur le mont des
Oliviers qu’Ézéchiel voit se reposer la gloire de Dieu quittant le Temple (Ez 11 :23); il joue un rôle
important dans le combat eschatologique annoncé par Zacharie (Za 14 :4).’ CHAIGNON 2008: 88.
532
‘In Luke, of course, the disciples return with joy to the temple and are incessantly blessing God. In
Acts, on the other hand, the disciples return to the upper room where they “with one accord devoted
themselves to prayer” (Acts 1:14).’ PARSONS 1987: 194.
533
‘The scene at the end of Luke is a silent one... The Acts account, on the other hand, is more than half
dialogue – and the dialogue is important.’ PARSONS 1987: 197.
77
author records Christ’s final blessing and the apostles blessing God in the Temple; 534
Luke seems to refer to Jesus’ Ascension as a ‘departure’ in the Gospel and in Acts as a
‘glorification’; 535 and, finally, the ‘cloud’ motif and the appearance of the ‘two men in
white garments’ scene are missing in Lk 24. Concluding his comparison of the
Ascension in Luke-Acts, Parsons affirms that ‘variation produces movement... The
movement produced in these variations is striking. Repetition reaffirms the link between
the Gospel and Acts; variation impels the reader to leave the Gospel story and move on
to the story of the church.’ 536

Consequently, five elements of concern and divergence in Luke’s Ascension accounts

will be analysed: in Lk 24, the blessing of Jesus, the disciples’ state of joy and the
blessing in the Temple; in Acts 1, the forty-days period, the cloud motif and the angels
scene.

As I discussed before, Luke mentions Jesus raising his hands and blessing the apostles
only in the Ascension pericope at the end of his gospel. 537 The majority of scholars see
in the benediction gesture of Christ a priestly blessing, linking it to the OT blessings
accounts of Aaron (Lev 9:22) or Simeon, the High Priest (Sir 50:19-23). 538 Zwiep draws
attention to the fact that ‘especially the elsewhere unattested triad εὐλογία (= blessing)-
προσκύνησις - εὐλογία (= thanksgiving) should remove all doubt that the finale of Ben
Sira sets its imprint upon Luke’s Gospel finale.’ 539 Unlike these authors who compare
Jesus’ blessing with the action of Simon II, the high priest in Sir 50:20-21, Bock
(following Fitzmyer 1985: 1590 and Nolland 1993b: 1227) argues that ‘Luke lacks
emphasis on Jesus as priest.’ 540 However, C. Westermann stresses that, contrasting with

534
‘Kennzeichned für Lk 24 und nur dort vorhanden sind die Motive des Segens und der Proskynese, nur
in Apg 1 anzutreffen ist das Motiv der Wolke und die Engelszene. Durch diese je besonderen Motive
erhält jede der beiden Szenen einen ganz eigenen Charakter.’ LOHFINK 1971: 160.
535
The emphasis in Lk 24 is on the disciples and their final encounter with Jesus but, on the other hand in
Acts the Ascension is meant to assure them of Christ’s heavenly status. Again, the theological concerns of
the author prevail in describing the same event in different ways.
536
PARSONS 1987: 194.
537
‘Wird der Segen einer größeren Anzahl von Menschen erteilt, so bleibt es beim erheben der Hände,
das als Segensgeste im Neuen Testament nur beim Abschied Jesu in Lk 24:50 erwähnt wird und der
priesterlichen Segenspraxis entspricht... Durch die körperliche Zuwendung entspricht die Segengeste der
direkten Adressantenanrede, und wir als Wesensmerkal von Segenswünschen und –zusagen festgestellt
haben.’ HECKEL 2002: 346.
538
Among others, see: KOSANKE 1993: 67; LOHFINK 1971: 167-169; DILLON 1978: 220-224; JOHNSON
1991: 403-404; STEMPVOORT 1959: 34-35; HECKEL 2002: 77-93.
539
ZWIEP 1997: 88.
540
BOCK 1996: 1945; SCHWEMER 2003:228.
78
Jesus’ blessing which is a farewell benediction, the blessing gestures recorded in Sir 50
and Lev 9 have a cultic function. Significant differences between the priestly blessing
tradition and the one recorded by Luke can be observed. 541 Still, this does not purport
that Luke did not rely on the Jewish biblical accounts of the priestly blessings, such as
Sir 50. 542 Ulrich Heckel shows that only in Lev 9:22 and Sir 50:20 (LXX) the rising of
the hands is connected to the act of blessing, as in Lk 24. 543 Also, it seems clear that
Luke had a specific reason to place the blessing act at the end of Jesus’ earthly
ministry. 544 ‘The blessing marks the close of the earthly life; it witnesses to the ending
of a chapter, but it nevertheless means that the life still has significance for them [i.e.
the apostles]. It signals the drawing to a close of the period of the Jesus of history, but it
does so in such a way that that life, that episode in time, is taken up into the period that
is now to begin. It is an end which is at the same time not an end. It marks a beginning
of something which comes out of what is ending.’ 545 Parsons sees in this farewell
blessing an appropriate finale of the Gospel. 546 This act of priestly blessing upon the
disciples is directly linked to the apostles’ joyous state and their proskynesis. 547

The apostles’ response to Jesus’ blessing and departure is recorded in the last two verses
of the Third Gospel in terms of joy and obedience. While blessing God the eleven return
to Jerusalem in a state of joyfulness. 548 As I noted above, the apparent paradox of the
disciples’ reaction to their master’s departure, is easily explained by the promise made

541
The place of blessing is Bethany (on the Mount of Olives) and not the Temple; Christ blesses the
apostles with his power as God and not as a ritual gesture (this divine blessing is received with
proskynesis); the act of blessing is connected to the sending of God’s Spirit. Cf. HECKEL 2002: 89-93.
542
HECKEL 2002: 93.
543
HECKEL 2002: 77: ‘Da die erhobenen Hände in der Septuaginta nur in Lev 9:22; Sir 50:20 mit dem
Segnen verbunden sind, kann die lukanische Wortwahl kein Zufall sein.’
544
In BOCK’s opinion, the act of blessing the apostles in v. 51 ‘adds a note of solemnity and closure to the
proceeding’, but he also considers that ‘there is no need to read into this act a “final” departure’. BOCK
1996: 1944.
545
FRANKLIN 1975: 36. PARSONS 1987: 197.
546
PARSONS 1987: 197.
547
‘À l’acte de bénédiction de Jésus répondent un prosternement des disciples, leur joie tandis qu’ils
retournent à Jérusalem et leur propre bénédiction à Dieu dans le Temple. Ils adorent le mystère du Dieu
Sauveur manifesté dans l’Ascension du Seigneur Jésus en se prosternant devant lui ; ils retournent dans la
ville messianique en laissant éclater la joie messianique qui s’exprime dans le Temple en une prière de
bénédiction perpétuelle (διὰ παντὸς). Les temps messianiques sont inaugurés. À la bénédiction de Jésus
(εὐλογεῖν vv. 49-50) fait écho leur bénédiction dans le lieu de la présence de Dieu, tandis qu’ils
demeurent placés sous le geste de celui qui a été emporté au ciel.’ CHAIGNON 2008: 80.
548
MORRICE 1984: 96: ‘This was the joy of men who were convinced of the exaltation of their risen Lord
and who looked forward to the fulfilment of Christ’s promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit (cf. Acts
1:4f.).’
79
by Jesus before his Ascension: the disciples are to receive God’s spirit (24:49). The
term χαρά used by Luke to describe joy appears ‘especially where there is mention of
eschatological fulfilment of God’s plan of salvation in Jesus Christ.’ 549 It can be
observed that in Luke’s gospel only after the Ascension the disciples experience joy;
although joy is recorded for the first time after the resurrection in Lk 24:41 (associated
with disbelief), it is not until Christ’s departure scene that the author describes their
return with great joy. 550 As in Sir 50:21, the proskynesis in v. 52 represents a
consequence of Jesus’ blessing, the only difference being addressed to the ascended
Christ and not to the High Priest. 551 Therefore, it is most likely that the element of
proskynesis is also inspired by Sir 50:21. 552 Dillon observes that ‘this is the first time
the verb προσκυνέω is appearing in this gospel... Proper adoration was saved, so to
speak, to be tendered here at the ascension, with the proper term in use, depicting what
could only be the relation of the believing disciple to the Christ of Easter.’ 553

If in the gospel Luke does not explicitly indicate any timeframe between the
resurrection and the Ascension, in Acts 1:3 a period of forty days is mentioned. During
these forty days the apostles receive instruction regarding their mission to spread the
good news of Christ’s resurrection. 554 Parsons notes that ‘the period of forty days is
needed in Acts not to allow Jesus enough time to make appearances, but to assure the
reader that the disciples are “fully instructed” (see Acts 20:20, 27, 31). During this
period of time, then, Jesus spoke to them about ‘the things concerning the kingdom of
God” (1:3).’ 555 This symbolically charged, round number was used by the author in
order to transmit a certain message, that the apostles’ instruction was complete.
‘Furthermore, the typological force of the number forty prevents taking it as an exact
date. The forty days rather delimit the period of appearances and final instructions

549
MORRICE 1984: 75.
550
‘When he [i.e. Jesus] appears to the Eleven, they are “startled and frightened” supposing that they
beheld a spirit (24:37). It is not until the ascension that joy and understanding come to them (24:52-53).’
FRANKLIN, Christ the Lord, p. 31.
551
LOHFINK 1971: 172.
552
ZWIEP 1997: 93-94; cf. HECKEL 2002: 87.
553
DILLON 1978: 223. Cf. ZWIEP 1997: 93: ‘For the first time in Luke’s Gospel προσκύνησις is offered to
Jesus (notably in his absence!).’
554
‘Die Zeit zwischen Auferstehung und Himmelfahrt war “secundum ordinem redemptionis” nötig,
damit Christus durch verschiedene Erscheinungen die Wahrheit seiner Auferstehung beweisen und die
nun im Glauben gefestigten Jünger eingehender belehren konnte.’ MARSCHLER 2003: 624.
555
PARSONS 1987: 194; cf. ZWIEP 1997: 97.
80
before the ascension.’ 556 All the evidence suggests that Luke may have drawn his
mention of forty days of instruction from the Jewish-biblical tradition. 557 The number
forty is used metaphorically both in the OT and the NT, expressing a period of
preparation. 558 However, James D.G. Dunn offers another explanation for Luke’s use of
the forty days. He prefers ‘the explanation that the tradition of the first Pentecost was
already sufficiently established – that is, of the first great experience of the Spirit in
collective Christian memory, as having happened on the next pilgrim feast (Pentecost).
Forty days would be the next round number before fifty.’ 559 Anyway, it is clear that the
element of forty days cannot be taken literally and must be interpreted theologically. 560
Zwiep concludes that ‘the number forty should rather be seen in the light of Luke’s
tendency to introduce theologically significant, round numbers into his narratives.’ 561

In Acts 1:9, Luke introduces the cloud motif to describe the Ascension of Jesus into
heaven. The occurrence of the cloud in this passage seems to have a twofold meaning: it
is the vehicle of ascension and, also, it covers the eyes of the apostles. 562 As J.
Luzarraga observes, the cloud motif is found in the earliest kerygma in connection with
the Son of Man. 563 Many authors compare this cloud with the cloud of Transfiguration
(Lk 9:34) or with the cloud of divine presence from the OT (Exod 24:16-18; 33:9-11;
34:5; 2Macc 2:8; Ps 96:2). 564 Also, as I stated above, the pericope of the Ascension in

556
ZWIEP 1997: 98. Cf. LOHFINK 1971: 176; DONNE 1983: 71 n. 19; STEMPVOORT 1959: 39.
557
LOHFINK 1971: 180-181. ZWIEP stresses that the forty-day period reminds the reader ‘of the rabbinic
emphasis on reliable instruction, and in particular the forty-day scheme of the Jewish rapture traditions of
Ezra and Baruch, who instructed their disciples before they were taken up, to ensure that their teaching
would survive after their departure.’ ZWIEP 1997: 172.
558
The rain fell for forty days and flooded the earth (Gen 7:4, 12, 17; 8:6), Israel sojourns for forty years
in the desert (Exod 16:35; Deut 8:2, 4; 9:9, 25; Ps 95:10; Neh 9:21; Amos 5:25); Moses receives the law
after forty days on Mount Sinai (Exod 24:18; 34:28); King David reigns for forty years (1Kgs 2:11);
Elijah goes on Mount Horeb forty days and nights (1Kgs 19:8) King Solomon reigns for forty years over
Israel (2Ch 9:30); Jesus spends forty days in the wilderness, tempted by Satan (Mk 1:13; Lk 4:2). Cf.
KOSANKE 1993: 75; JERVELL 1998: 111; ZWIEP 2001: 344-345.
559
DUNN 2001: 306.
560
Cf. DUNN 2001: 307; FRANKLIN 1975: 33; CHAIGNON 2008: 86-87; RIUS-CAMPS; READ-
HEIMERDINGER 2004: 64-66.
561
ZWIEP 1997: 187;
562
Cf. FRANKLIN 1975: 32. ‘Just as the cloud at the transfiguration prevented the by-standers from seeing
what happened and at the same time provided Moses and Elijah with access to the heavenly realm, so the
ascension cloud has a double function.’ ZWIEP 1997: 105.
563
‘Para valorar el pensamiento evangélido sobre la nube en la Ascensión de Jesús, hay que tener en
cuenta también los otros momentos en que Jesús viene conectado con la nube en la predicación primitiva,
sobre todo en su identificación con el Hijo del Hombre, a la que nos referiremos más adelante.’
LUZARRAGA 1973: 221.
564
LOHFINK 1971: 189; cf. ZWIEP 1997: 105; CHAIGNON 2008: 95-96; LUZARRAGA 1973: 223-224.
81
Acts is linked with the prophecies regarding the Son of Man who will come on the
clouds of heaven (Dan 7:13, cf. Mk 23:26; Matt 24:30). 565 Lohfink argues that Luke
probably used and edited the markan tradition of the coming of the Son of Man. 566
Dunn concludes by saying that ‘Luke was probably aware not only of the role of the
cloud in rapture/assumption stories, but also of the apocalyptic imagery of Jesus’
parousia on clouds. The point is that such apocalyptic language would be widely
recognised even then as having a symbolic rather than literal force.’ 567 The function of
the cloud in the Ascension narrative is clearly to indicate the separation between the
earthly world and heaven and Luke uses this motif as a vehicle which transfers Jesus
into the divine realm. 568

Last, but not least the appearance of the two angels scene is introduced in Acts 1:10-11
in order to elucidate fully the significance of the Ascension event and to connect it to
the Parousia. 569 As the angeli interpretes from the empty tomb narrative (Lk 24:4; cf. Jn
20:12), the two men in white garments transmit a very important message: that Jesus
will come back at the end of times. 570 Lohfink argues that the number of two men
(ἄνδρες δύο) represents a topos used by Luke first in his gospel (24:4) and drawn from a
pre-Lukan tradition (cf. Gen 19:1; Dan 12:5; 2Macc 3:26, 33; 3Macc 6:18; 2En 1:4; Mk
16:3). 571 Estrada emphasises the ‘vital’ role that this description of the two men has for
the Ascension scene’s finale. ‘From the readers’ perspective (even if one argues that the
two men in Lk 24 are not the same as the two men in Acts 1), the credibility of the two
men in dazzling apparel has already been established and substantiated in Lk 24, that is,
their message about Jesus being alive is true.’ Therefore, he says, ‘the validity of what
they are promising the Eleven is no longer a question for the readers of Acts.’ 572

565
WITHERINGTON III 1998: 112; KOSANKE 1993: 76-77; BUTH 1998: 189.
566
LOHFINK 1971: 187-193.
567
DUNN 2001: 318; cf. PARSONS 1987: 198.
568
LUZARRAGA 1973: 225.
569
Zwiep observes that ‘what is often overlooked is that the words of the angelic interpreters are most
appropriate to the occasion seen from the Jewish rapture perspective: they connect Jesus’
rapture/ascension with his eschatological return (“this Jesus... will come in the same way as you saw him
going”), not with his present position in heaven as the Exalted One (“this Jesus... God has exalted”) as in
the kerygmatic sections in the missionary speeches of Acts.’ ZWIEP 2001: 346. Cf. KOSANKE 1993: 73.
570
‘The two men vindicate belief in the parousia though they show that the glorification of Jesus does not
depend upon it.’ FRANKLIN 1975. Cf. ESTRADA 2004: 51; ZWIEP 1997: 107.
571
‘Die Zweizahl der Engel in Apg 1:10 ist lukanisch und geht auf die Zweizahl der Engel in der
Grabesgeschichte (Lk 24:4) zurück. Dort dürfte das Motiv bereits vorlukanisch sein.’ LOHFINK 1971: 198.
572
ESTRADA 2004: 51-52.
82
In conclusion, it must be pointed out that although the two Ascension narratives seem to
be in disagreement, those variations in the text may be explained by their functions
within Luke-Acts. It is clear that Luke describes the same event of Christ’s Ascension in
both his books and he intended to do so. The intended purpose of each of them is both
to describe a historical event and to reassure the readers of the status of Jesus and his
followers.

83
 CHAPTER 4: THE RECEPTION AND INTERPRETATION OF THE ASCENSION
IN PRE-NICENE CHRISTIANITY

4.1 Traditions of the ascension(s) in Christian apocryphal literature

Although the Ascension is described in the New Testament only in the Lukan writings
(and in the interpolated ‘longer ending’ of Mark), there are a number of extra-canonical
sources which offer a narration of Christ’s departure into heaven. 573

It can be easily observed that, unlike the pre-Nicene patristic writers, the authors of
apocryphal literature do not simply record the Ascension tradition as preserved in the
NT, but resort to the apocalyptic Jewish traditions and imaginative reconstructions. 574 In
the subsequent section I will analyse some of the most important Christian witnesses of
the ascension traditions.

4.1.1 Ascensions of Old Testament figures

The Life of Adam and Eve

The Latin version of the primary book of Adam is commonly known by the name of
Vitae Adam et Evae, and it is certain that it represents a translation of a Greek
original. 575 Stone presents another hypothesis, adopted by many contemporary scholars,
which affirms that the Apocalypse of Moses (the Greek book of Adam and Eve) is itself
a translation from a Semitic language, and that the other works somehow derive from
it. 576 Most probably, the original composition was produced between 100 BC and A.D.
200 in Alexandria.

The eighth pericope (25:1-29:10), found only in the Latin recension, represents a
narration in Midrashic form of the ascension into heaven of Adam (a vision). 577 This
addition (chs. 25-29) with visions of Adam narrated to Seth, and the other editorial

573
PARSONS 1987: 145.
574
DAVIES 1058: 78.
575
STONE 1992: 14-15.
576
STONE 1992: 43; see also: TROMP 2005.
577
For the present study I used the critical Synopsis edition of ANDERSON; STONE 1994: 23.
84
activities on the part of the Latin translator or his Greek Vorlage gave birth to a
completely different document. 578

In LAE 25:1-3 (Vitae) Adam recounts his assumption to the heavenly paradise
accompanied by the archangel Michael, and sees the divine throne and even God
himself:

₁ Adam said to Seth, ‘Listen, Seth, my son, and I will pass on to you what I heard and saw.
₂After your mother and I had been driven out of Paradise, while we were praying, Michael
the archangel and messenger of God came to me. ₃ And I saw a chariot like the wind and
its wheels were fiery. I was carried off into the Paradise of righteousness, and I saw the
Lord sitting and his appearance was unbearable flaming fire. And many thousands of
angels were at the right and the left of the chariot. 579

The Paradise of righteousness to which Adam is taken in his vision, other than the
earthly Garden of Eden (referred to as the Paradise), is clearly the Heaven. 580 The
heavenly journey of Adam must not be understood as expressing a rapture topos,
because in this case there are no mentions of a physical taking up into Paradise. 581 In
LAE (Apocalypse) 33, before Adam’s death, Eve receives a vision of the heavenly
things and the soul of Adam is taken up into heaven.

Meyer argued that the Latin Vitae was translated after the third or fourth century AD.

Levison (1988) affirmed that the main purpose of the work is to ‘exonerate Adam and
denigrate Eve.’ 582 It is generally assumed that the text represents a Christian addition
made by a later editor and based on Merkabah tradition.

The Martyrdom and Ascension of Isaiah

The Ascension of Isaiah is a Jewish-Christian apocalypse written probably in Syria,

between A.D. 112 and 138. 583 The document is a composite work, combining the old
Jewish legend of the Martyrdom of Isaiah (chapters 1-5) 584 and the Vision of Isaiah

578
DE JONGE2000: 246-247.
579
LAE 25:1-3, in JOHNSON, OTP 2: 261.
580
COLLINS 1996: 33.
581
ZWIEP 1997: 22.
582
STONE 1992: 23.
583
KNIGHT 1995: 9.
584
The Martyrdom of Isaiah, which is a composite itself, recounts and develops the events of 2Kgs 21.
An independent section, 3:13-4:22, called the Testament of Hezekiah (or The First Vision) is identified as
a Christian apocalypse, describing a vision of the coming of Jesus. Cf. KNIGHT 1996: 13-14.
85
(chapters 6-11), which is a Christian interpolation. 585 If in the case of the former we can
argue that it was probably composed in Hebrew and translated into Greek, in the case of
the Visions, it was certainly written in Greek from the beginning. Although the writing
is extant in a number of different languages (Greek, Ethiopic, Latin, Slavonic, Coptic),
the complete writing survived only in three Ethiopic manuscripts. 586

In the second part of the book, the Vision of Isaiah, a heavenly journey of Isaiah is
described, assisted by an angel through the Seven Heavens. Isaiah sees the Lord
ascending through the seven heavens, and this ascension is described in detail,
combining the physical departure of Christ with the notion of glorification (11:22-33). It
is most certainly a Christian composition concentrated on Jesus’ death, his resurrection,
and especially on the ascension. 587 There is an interesting analogy of Isaiah’s mystical
journey with the later Hekhalot Rabbati. 588

₂₂ And the angel who led me said to me, ‘Understand, Isaiah.’ And I saw when he sent out
the twelve disciples and ascended. ₂₃ And I saw him, and he was in the firmament, but was
not transformed into their form. And all the angels of the firmament, and Satan, saw him
and worshipped. ₂₄ And there was much sorrow there as they said, ‘How did our Lord
descend upon us, and we did not notice the glory which was upon him, which we (now)
see was upon him from the sixth heaven? ₂₅ And he ascended into the second heaven, and
he was not transformed, but all the angels who (were) on the right and on the left, and the
throne in the middle, ₂₆ worshipped him, and praised him, and said, ‘How did our Lord
remain hidden from us as he descended, and we did not notice?’ ₂₇ And in the same way
he ascended into the third (heaven), and in the same way they praised him and spoke. ₂₈
And in the fourth heaven and also the fifth they spoke exactly the same way. ₂₉ But there
was one glory, and from it he was not transformed. ₃₀ And I saw when he ascended into
the sixth heaven, that they worshipped him and praised him; ₃₁ but in all the heavens the
praise grew louder. ₃₂ And I saw how he ascended into the seventh heaven, and all the
righteous and all the angels praised him. And then I saw that he sat down at the right hand
of that Great Glory, whose glory I told you I could not behold. ₃₃ And also I saw that the
angel of the Holy Spirit sat on the left. 589

585
The second part (also called The Second Vision), which is also a Christian composition, is related
thematically to the first five chapters and was added much later to the corpus. KNIGHT 1996: 15.
586
The Ethiopic translation was probably made in the fifth century after a Greek version. For an
introduction to the different MSS preserved, see: KNIBB, OTP 2: 144-146; and the current critical edition:
BETTIOLO; KOSSOVA; LEONARDI et al 1995: 3-39.
587
‘Une deuxième partie décrit comment le prophète, par une voyage dans les sept cieux, est témoin de la
venue du Christ au monde (6-11). La provenance chrétienne de 3,13-4,22 et de 6-11 est généralement
reconnue.’ VERHEYDEN 1989: 247.
588
‘The text describes how a mystic told his disciples what was happening to him as he made a heavenly
ascension.’ KNIGHT 1995: 67.
589
VisIs 11:22-33, in KNIBB, OTP 2: 175-176.
86
The Beloved One ascends to heaven and receives angelic worship and praise in all the
heavens, and then, in the seventh, he takes his seat at the right hand of the throne of God.
Knight suggests that the idea of enthronement seems to be derived from 1Pet 3:22, and
therefore from Ps 110:1. 590 The final verse (11:33) completes the Trinitarian image of
God’s throne. Enrico Norelli interprets this episode as a divine (heavenly) liturgy. 591
Isaiah is presented here in relation to the Beloved and his martyrdom results from his
vision of Christ’s heavenly journey, including his crucifixion. Furthermore, in the
Ethiopic version of AscenIs 9:16 Jesus’ Ascension occurs 545 days after the
resurrection, a tradition probably taken from Gnostic sources. 592

As John Alsup concludes ‘the literary genre of the text is a prophetic vision with
apocalyptic features and is distinct from the gospel appearance story Gattung.’ 593
Although its form is that of an apocalypse, the focus of the book is on the history of
Jesus (the past) and not on eschatology. 594 The typological unity resides in many aspects
of the life and death of the prophet, as depicted in this Christian writing. Although some
parallels between the Ascension of Isaiah and Luke-Acts can be identified, 595 a literary
dependence on Lukan writings cannot be sustained with certainty, but it might reflect a
common tradition. 596

A number of other pseudepigraphal writings that contain Christian additions describe

ascents to heaven of OT figures. In the Apocalypse of Abraham 15 597 a temporary ascent
to heaven may be found. In this vision, Abraham is carried by ‘many winds’, sees a

590
KNIGHT, The Ascension of Isaiah, p. 77.
591
‘Ora, il contest è quello della liturgia celeste. Della vergine dello spiritu si dice che, pur sedendo sul
trono, loda incessantemente Sabaoth, e quindi si può dedurre che Christo ed essa siano al culmine della
lode celeste.’ NORELLI 1995: 588.
592
KNIBB, OTP 2: 170; ZWIEP 1997: 99. Compare also the Letter of James 2:19-24 (ELLIOTT 1993: 675)
which mentions 550 days and Pistis Sophia 1 (HENNECKE 1963: 252-253) where Christ ascended in the
twelfth year after the resurrection.
593
ALSUP 1975: 138.
594
NORRIS 2004: 34.
595
Cf. the use of ‘Elect One’ (AscenIs 8:7 – Lk 9:35; 23:35), Isaiah’s praise of God for his promise
(AscenIs 8:22 – Lk 24:49; Acts 2:33), and of the ascension (AscenIs 11:22-33 – Lk 24:50-52; Acts 1:9-
11).
596
‘Yet these are hardly evidence of literary dependence, for they may easily be explained as arising from
shared beliefs and/or a similar theological milieu... Therefore there is insufficient evidence from which to
conclude that the Ascension of Isaiah is a witness to the knowledge and use of Luke.’ GREGORY 2003: 77.
On the other hand, François BOVON (2005: 385) thinks that the author of the Ascension of Isaiah may
have used Luke as his source.
597
Composed between the first and second century A.D. in Hebrew and latter interpolated by a Christian
author, this apocryphon is extant only in an Old Slavonic translation.
87
‘strong light which cannot be described’ and then returns to earth (ApAb 30). 598 In this
description many elements of ascent traditions can be identified (angel guide, fire, water,
winds) and resembles the esoteric texts of the Hekhalot literature. 599 In the Testament of
Isaac 6 600 a vision is recorded in which Isaac is assumed into heaven before his death
and sees Abraham. The same pattern is also found in the Testament of Jacob 5, where
the OT patriarch is taken by the archangel Michael into the heavenly realm for a
preliminary tour of the next world, an account known to us only in the Bohairic
recension. 601 All of the above discussed accounts of OT figures’ raptures follow or lead
to the Ascension of the Messiah.

4.1.2 Texts which describe the Ascension of Christ

In the Sibylline Oracles 1:379-382, a Christian interpolation, 602 the resurrection and
Ascension of Jesus is recorded briefly in the form of a prophecy: ‘...he [the Messiah]
will mount on clouds and journey to the house of heaven leaving to the world the
account of the gospel.’ 603 The cloud serves as the vehicle of the ascent, a typical
element in the Hellenistic and Jewish rapture stories. 604 The fact that the Ascension in
early Christianity was understood as a part of the glorification of Jesus (resurrection-
ascension) is also testified by the Testament of Benjamin, where the Saviour ‘shall
ascend from Hades and shall pass on from earth to heaven.’ 605 The ascent from Hades is
mentioned also in the second part of the Gospel of Nicodemus, Christ’s Descent into
Hell 1(17).1 606 and the Testament of Benjamin 9:3, 607 and may reflect an old Christian
tradition. 608

598
RUBINKIEWICZ, in OTP 1: 696.
599
DEAN-OTTING 1984: 248-255; FUJITA 1986: 173.
600
Probably composed originally in Greek in the second century A.D., the writing is known only in
Christian translations. OTP 1: 909.
601
OTP 1: 916. Cf. GrApEzra 5:7.
602
The SibOr consists of an original Jewish oracle and an extensive Christian redaction. The passage
follows after the first seven generations of the Jewish Oracle and describes the incarnation and career of
Christ. The Christian interpolation was probably made in the late second century.
603
COLLINS, OTP 1: 343.
604
ZWIEP 1997: 104.
605
TBenj 9:3, in KEE, OTP 1: 827.
606
ELLIOTT 1993: 190, 198.
607
OTP 1: 827.
608
LOHFINK 1971: 105-106.
88
Among the extra-canonical writings, two texts are of great interest for the discussion of
the reception of the Lukan ascension narrative. In the Acts of Pilate 609 14:1, the day of
the Ascension seems to coincide with the day of the resurrection. 610 Recording a
testimony of rabbi Phineës, the author writes: ‘And while Jesus was still speaking to his
disciples, we saw him taken up into heaven.’ 611 This description seems to rely on Lk
24:50, but the author of ActPil also shows knowledge of Acts when he records the
Ascension as taking place on a mountain and Jesus departing on a cloud in ActPhil
16:6. 612 Jesus’ visible translation is compared here with the ascension of Enoch implied
in Gen 5. A visible Ascension of Christ is also found in the Epistle of the Apostles 51: 613
‘And as he spoke, there was thunder and lightning and an earthquake, and the heavens
divided and a bright cloud came and took him away.’ Again, the Ascension is described
in terms of exaltation kerygma (on the day of the resurrection), with extensive use of
apocalyptic motifs. 614 Nonetheless, this pericope shows a probable dependence on the
Ascension accounts in Luke-Acts. 615

4.2 The Reception of the Ascension in Early Christian Writers

The question of the reception of the Ascension story as presented by Luke was until
recently ignored. However, a first attempt to identify the use of Luke-Acts in early
Christianity (second century) was made by Andrew Gregory in his doctoral thesis. He
concludes by stating that ‘the earliest external evidence for Luke can be dated no earlier
than the activity of Marcion and Justin in the mid second-century, which means only
that it must have been written in some form by c. 140. Certain attestation for Acts is
later, but it may be dated securely to probably not much later than the middle of the
609
ActPil was probably composed in Greek and its dating is uncertain. However, the majority of scholars
consider it to go back to the fifth-sixth century, although the material is certainly much older. Cf. ELLIOTT
1993: 164-166; HENNECKE 1963: 444-449.
610
ZWIEP 1997: 143.
611
ELLIOTT 1993: 179.
612
PARSONS 1987: 145; LOHFINK 1971: 133. However, it is also possible that the author of ActPhil may
have drawn from another source (probably Matt 28:16-20) as the three rabbis, Agas, Phineës and
Angaeus, witness the Ascension from Mount Mamlich (Galilee) and not from the Mount of Olives
(Jerusalem). Cf. LEIBNER 2009: 174-175.
613
Also referred to as Epistula Apostolorum, the text is generally dated to the second century. Cf.
HENNECKE 1963: 189-191.
614
As LOHFINK (1971: 130-133) suggests, the time of the Ascension on the resurrection Day, ‘after three
days and three hours’, may be dependent on Mk 16:3 (Codex Bobiensis).
615
BOVON 2005: 386.
89
second century if it was written – as seems all but certain – by the same author as Luke,
and this coheres with Acts being known and used by the time of Irenaeus.’ 616 By this he
does not imply that these texts were not used prior to the dates above, but that there is
no external evidence to be found in supporting this idea. In fact, the same may be said
with regard to all New Testament books: until the mid second-century no citations from
NT can be found, and only in a few cases some allusions may be traced, probably based
on common traditions. 617 This can be easily explained through the extensive use of oral
tradition still alive in that early Christian period.

The use of Luke in the first half of the second century was minimal, as observed by
Arthur Bellinzoni. He notes that ‘for the first half of the second century, the sources of
Jesus’ traditions seem to have been oral tradition or pregospel collections of traditions.
There was apparently little or no significant use of the Gospel of Luke before 150.’ 618
François Bovon identifies a list of 17 writings from the second century that witness
certain knowledge of passages from Luke’s Gospel or used it as their source. 619 In
response to Bovon’s analysis, Gregory draws attention to the fact that these authors
might have drawn on a tradition used also by Luke. ‘If such material originates with
Luke, then “parallels” in later texts may reflect the dependence on his account. If Luke
reproduces earlier traditions, such “parallels” may reflect the independent use of shared
traditions, not the dependence of a later author on Luke.’ 620 Like Bovon, he finds
evidence for the reception of Acts in three apocryphal Acts from the second century. 621

Gregory emphasises the reception of Luke’s gospel saying that ‘only with Marcion,
Tatian and Irenaeus (and perhaps Valentinus) is the evidence sufficient to demonstrate

616
GREGORY 2003: 353.
617
Barbara ALAND (1989: 1) records that ‘was die Evangelien betrifft, so ist es sachgemäßer, bis etwa zur
Mitte des 2. Jahrhunderts gar nicht von Zitaten zu redden, sondern von der Weitergabe des synoptischen
Stoffes durch die umprägende, neu formulierende sowie Neues hinzufügende und erweiternde Kraft der
lebendigen, vom Geist erfüllten Gemeinde und ihrer Predigt.’
618
BELLINZONI 1998: 61.
619
He mentions the Gospel of the Ebionites, the Gospel of the Nazarenes, the Gospel of Peter, the so-
called Unknown Gospel (fragments of Papyrus Egerton 2), the Gospel of Thomas, the Traditions of
Matthias (cited by Clement of Alexandria in Stromata 2.45.4, 3.26.3, 7.82.1), Papyrus Cairensis 10735,
the Ascension of Isaiah, the Questions of Bartholomew, the Epistula Apostolorum, the ‘longer ending’ of
Mark, Codex Bezae (in which the author tries ‘to bring Luke’s Gospel closer to Matthew’s’), the
Protoevangelium of James, the Infancy Gospel according to Thomas, the Apocalypse of Peter, Tatian’s
Diatessaron, Sibylline Oracles. Most of these texts recount the ‘birth story’ in a similar way as Luke.
BOVON 2005: 382-389.
620
GREGORY 2005: 405. Cf. GREGORY 2003: 350.
621
The Acts of Paul, the Acts of Peter and the Acts of John. Cf. GREGORY 2003: 343-349.
90
that Luke was used as a continuous whole in something like the form in which it is
known today. Only with Irenaeus is the evidence sufficient to demonstrate that the third
Gospel is treated explicitly under the title Luke 622 and as one of four definitive accounts
of the life of Jesus that are to be held in tension with each other.’ 623 It is easily observed
that by the middle of the second century, Luke-Acts were known but their influence
within the Christian communities was minimal. Irenaeus mentions that the Gospel of
Luke (in an incomplete form) was used by Marcion. 624 Bovon argues that Marcion
might have received Luke’s Gospel in Pontus, because ‘Rome does not seem to know
the third gospel until the middle of the century; 1 Clement and Hermas show no
knowledge of it at all.’ 625 The importance of Luke’s gospel in Marcion’s thought is also
confirmed by his Gospel, which represents an edited form of Luke. 626 However, no
mention of the Ascension is found in Marcion’s Gospel. 627 Bellinzoni notes that ‘what
is significant about Marcion for our purposes is his elevation of the Gospel of Luke and
Paul’s letters to the status of Scripture and his simultaneous rejection of the Jewish
Scriptures. Before Marcion, no canon of the New Testament existed, and probably no
thought of one.’ 628

Justin Martyr, the most important second-century Christian apologist, used both oral
tradition and written sources (such as Matthew and Luke) in his writings. He
extensively refers to the Ascension and seems to be acquainted with the Lukan
description. 629 Bovon draws attention to the fact that the Luke-Acts also attracted the
attention of the Gnostics, and that ‘nearly all the Gnostic schools had an ongoing
interest in Luke’s Gospel.’ 630

622
He notes in Adversus Haereses 3.1.1-11 that ‘Luke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the
Gospel that was preached by him.’ Also the Book of Acts received its title only in the second century. Cf.
STERLING 1992: 314.
623
GREGORY 2003: 297.
624
Adversus Haereses 3.11.7. BELLINZONI 1998: 62: ‘In undermining the authority of the Jewish Bible,
Marcion needed to substitute another scriptural authority for use in the Christian churches, and so he
created a new edition of the Gospel of Luke and the ten Pauline letters to purify them of what he regarded
as later additions. Marcion’s version of the Gospel of Luke followed the accepted procedures of the
period by reworking and editing the ancient text.’ Cf. GREGORY 2005: 409.
625
BOVON 2005: 396.
626
Cf. HENNECKE; SCHNEEMELCHER 1963: 348-349.
627
TYSON 2006: 45-46.
628
BELLINZONI 1998: 63.
629
BOVON 2005: 395.
630
BOVON 2005: 392; cf. GREGORY 2005: 409.
91
However, it was only with Irenaeus and the first attempts to form a NT canon that the
two Lukan books gained universal recognition in the present form. 631 Irenaeus, the most
important Christian writer of the second century, as cited by Eusebius, affirmed that he
heard Polycarp of Smyrna (ca. 69-155) as a boy, receiving the Gospel tradition orally. 632
Although this tradition is highly questionable, Polycarp is said to have received the
tradition from the Apostle John as his disciple and this conferred him legitimacy: the
tradition he received was apostolic and, therefore, orthodox (authentic). 633 We can
assume that in the period prior to Irenaeus the oral tradition was more influential than
the written one. As Gregory asserts: ‘texts such as Luke [or/and Acts] were recognized
to be authoritative precisely because they were in agreement with the living and
apostolic tradition, not vice versa.’ 634 Irenaeus pointed to Scriptures (both Jewish and
Christian) as a proof of orthodox Christianity against heresies and implicitly emphasised
the necessity of a NT canon. 635

In conclusion, it is difficult to establish a reception of Luke-Acts in the second century,

but it does not mean that the second-century authors did not use the Lukan writings. 636
Beginning with the third century, the Ascension starts to be seen as a central event of
the History of Redemption (along with the resurrection and the coming of the Spirit)
631
‘To be considered as canonical, a document had to pass three tests: (1) it had to have been written by
an apostle or by an immediate disciple of an apostle; (2) it had to be recognized as authentic by at least
one leading ecclesiastical community in the ancient Church; and (3) it had to be consistent with apostolic
doctrine – that is, with the rule of faith preserved in the living tradition of the Church. During the second
and third centuries – largely through the efforts of St. Irenaeus of Lyons, Hippolytus of Rome, Tertullian,
Clement of Alexandria and Origen – the idea of a New Testament canon was established, but the
constitution of a canon was widely disputed.’ CRONK 1982: 123.
632
‘And there is Polycarp, who not only was taught by the apostles and conversed with many who had
seen the Lord, but also was established by apostles in Asia in the church at Smyrna. We ourselves saw
him in our early youth, for he lived long and was in extreme old age when he left this life in a most
glorious and most noble martyrdom. He always taught the doctrine he had learned from the apostles,
which he delivered to the church, and it alone is true.’ IRENAEUS, Against Heresies III.4, in GRANT 1997:
126. Cf. EUSEBIUS, Ecclesiastical History 5.20, in DEFERRARI 1953: 329.
633
Luke himself drew on both written and oral tradition and there is a ‘strong possibility (perhaps the
probability) that Luke included in his narrative very little that was not known elsewhere, at least among
others with whom he may have shared some of the traditions to which he was privy before he committed
them to writing.’ GREGORY 2005: 403.
634
GREGORY 2005: 410.
635
‘In determining the canonicity of the Christian writings, Irenaeus insisted that both apostolicity and
ecclesiastical tradition should be demonstrated (Adv. Haer. 5.20.2). He referred to two such groups of
Christian writings: the four gospels and the writings of the apostles.’ BELLINZONI 1998: 72.
636
GREGORY 2005: 406: ‘I agree with Bovon that we cannot demonstrate that many second-century
authors knew Luke, and I am perhaps more cautious than he is on this question. But the fact that second-
century authors may not leave evidence that allows us to demonstrate their use of Luke does not mean
that they did not use it.’
92
within the early Christian church. 637 In the following sections the references to the
departure of Christ in the early Christian writings will be analysed (the writings of the
Apostolic Fathers and Ante-Nicene authors until Eusebius of Caesarea).

4.2.1 The Apostolic Fathers

The references to the Ascension in the writings of the Apostolic Fathers are few, often
implied rather than explicitly formulated. 638 Their purpose was not to interpret the
apostolic tradition but to affirm it. ‘It is not surprising then to find a discernible echo of
the Apostolic preaching in these documents, although they have the character, not only
of systematic expositions of the Christian faith, but of occasional utterances, pastoral in
intent.’ 639 In four of the Apostolic Fathers some references or allusions to the Ascension
of Jesus can be found: Clement, Ignatius, Polycarp and the author of The Epistle of
Barnabas.

Although Clement does not mention the Ascension anywhere in his Epistle to the
Corinthians, two important elements of the early Ascension kerygma can be identified.
First, in discussing the Salvation brought by Christ, the author cites Ps 110.1 in 1Clem
36:5. As I pointed out before, in early Christian thought this psalm was connected with
the Ascension as a prophecy on the enthronement and glorification of Christ in heaven
(Mk 16:19; cf. Heb 1:13). 640 An allusion to Jesus’ Ascension was identified by Lohfink
in 1Clem 42:3, where the author notes that the Apostles were instructed by Jesus after
his resurrection (and also ‘fully assured by the resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ’ 641)
before commencing their mission of preaching the Gospel. Even though the Ascension
is not mentioned, Clement records the fact that the Apostles received the Holy Spirit
after Christ’s resurrection and departure, being in this way prepared to fulfil their
promise to preach Jesus’ Gospel. 642 Lohfink concludes observing that ‘Clement follows

637
Cf. LOHFINK 1971: 104.
638
LARRAÑAGA 1938: 492.
639
DAVIES 1958: 69.
640
‘Klemens spricht wenigstens an einer Stelle von der (unsichtbaren) Erhöhung Jesu zur Rechten Gottes.
Er zitiert nämlich in Kapitel 36 die Psalmen 2:7 und 109:1 im Anschlus an Hebr 1.’ LOHFINK 1971: 100.
641
HOLMES 2007: 101.
642
‘Hier hätte die Formulierung nahgelegen, daß die Apostel nach der Himmelfahrt Jesu in der Fülle des
Heiligen Geistes ausgezogen seien. Eine Erwähnung der Himmelfahrt fehlt jedoch.’ LOHFINK 1971: 99.
93
the early Christian Ascension-kerygma, as we have found outside the Lukan writings in
the New Testament. Of a visible ascension of Jesus, he seems to know nothing.’ 643

In the seven letters of Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, the first reference to the Ascension is
found in the Epistle to the Magnesians 7:2 (c. 110), where the author follows a
Johannine schema: at the end of his mission Jesus Christ returns to the Father from
whom he came into the world. 644 However, following this there is no visible ascension
meant in IgnMagn 7:2. In his Epistle to the Trallians 9:2, the author affirms that Jesus
was raised up by the Father (from the dead) as an act of vindication. 645 The Ascension is
not mentioned but implied. 646 The next reference among Ignatius’ letters is the text from
the Epistle to the Smyrneans 3:3: ‘And after his resurrection he ate and drank with them
like one who is composed of flesh, although spiritually he was united with the
Father.’ 647 The text underlines the reality of the bodily resurrection of Christ. 648
Although Hugo Koch sees in this verse the Ascension to the Father as being implied,
Larrañaga thinks that the words πνευματικῶς ἡνωμένος are meant to express only the
unity between the divine nature of Jesus and the Father. 649 The humanity of Christ was
not yet exalted, as he was still with the Apostles on earth. 650 Lohfink thinks that

643
LOHFINK 1971: 100.
644
‘Ainsi, prétendre, d’après cette formule que saint Ignace applique à toute la vie terrestre de Jésus, qu’il
s’agit là d'une union plus grande du Fils avec le Père comme conséquence de l'ascension corporelle du
Christ au jour de Pâques, c’est introduire dans le texte des idées qui n’y sont point. Le fait que Jésus a
mangé et bu avec ses disciples n’est pas précisé, parce que son union avec le Père est autre qu'elle n’était
auparavant, mais uniquement à cause de la force de vérité que ce détail donne à la résurrection corporelle
du Christ: c’est ce que l’évêque d'Antioche a voulu souligner ici.’ LARRAÑAGA 1938: 498. Cf. DAVIES
1958: 69.
645
Cf. ZWIEP 1997: 123.
646
‘Man geht also besser davon aus, daß der Himmelfahrt Jesu bei Ignatius grundsätzlich keine andere
Funktion zukommt als in der älteren, urchristlichen Tradition. Sie kann genant werden, kann aber auch
fehlen, und sie ist vor allem noch kein festes Heilsdatum im christologischen Kerygma.’ LOHFINK 1971:
102.
647
HOLMES, The Apostolic Fathers, p. 251. The long recension reads: ‘And thus was He, with the flesh,
received up in their sight unto Him that sent Him, being with that same flesh to come again, accompanied
by glory and power. For, say the [holy] oracles, “This same Jesus, who is taken up from you into heaven,
shall so come, in like manner as ye have seen Him go unto heaven.”’ IgnSmyrn 3, in ANCL 1: 243. It has
been widely recognised that this ‘long recension’ represents an interpolated version of the original
(probably in the 4th century). Nonetheless, it expresses the Christian thought and reception of the
Ascension tradition in the 4th century, and also testifies on the fact that this text was regarded as referring
to the Ascension.
648
Cf. ZWIEP 1997: 101.
649
LARRAÑAGA 1938: 494. Cf. LOHFINK 1971: 102.
650
‘Dans cette période intermédiaire des apparitions, il montre le Christ uni au Père dans sa divinité, mais
non dans son humanité; c’est pour cela qu'il mange encore et qu'il boit avec ses disciples comme aux
94
IgnSmyrn 3:3 records the early tradition of the Ascension on Easter day. 651 The parallels
with Lk 24:41b-43 are clear but, nevertheless, seem to suggest that Ignatius drew on a
source similar to or even used by Luke. 652 Gregory stresses that ‘there is no compelling
reason to suggest that Ignatius drew on Luke, and there are strong, if not compelling,
reasons to suggest that he may not have done… Thus already at an early stage in the
second century the witness of Ignatius illustrates and reinforces the methodological
point that the use of Luke-like material need not provide evidence of the knowledge and
use of Luke.’ 653 In conclusion, one can say that Ignatius took over a primitive exaltation
tradition which does not witness any post-resurrection appearance or a visible ascension
of Christ. 654

The same tradition may be found also in Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians, where the
author does not recount a visible departure of Jesus but mentions that God ‘raised our
Lord Jesus Christ from the dead and gave him glory and a throne at his right hand’
(PolPhil 2:1). 655 Zwiep sees in the kerygmatic formulae τὸν ἐγείραντα τὸν κύριον ἡμῶν
Ἰησοῦν Χριστὸν ἐκ νεκρῶν one of the ‘oldest recoverable articulations of resurrection
faith’. 656 Also, as in the case of the other aforementioned texts, it is difficult to identify
whether or not Polycarp draws on Lukan tradition. 657

Finally, the most relevant text for the present discussion is the Epistle of Barnabas. In
15:9, as an argument for the Christian liturgical celebration on Sunday, the resurrection

jours de sa vie mortelle, parce que son humanité, même glorifiée, n’est pas encore montée au ciel.’
LARRAÑAGA 1938: 496.
651
‘Es ist nicht zeitlos gemeint, sondern soll besagen: Seitdem Jesus im Vater ist – also seit seinem
Unsichtbarwerden – tritt er um so mehr in Erscheinung. Denn das eigentlich Wesenhafte und Wirkende
ist nicht das Sichtbare, sondern ruht im Unsichtbaren... Es meint die durch die Erhöhung in ein neues
Stadium tretende Einigung mit dem Vater. IgnSm 3:3 belegt deshalb keineswegs einen Zwischenzustand
Jesu nach der Auferstehung, in dem seine »Menschheit« noch nicht in den Himmel aufgefahren ist.
Vielmehr setzt die Stelle genau wie IgnMagn 7:2 die urchristliche Erhöhungsauffassung – wenn auch
verdeckt durch eine andere Terminologie – als selbstverständlich voraus.’ LOHFINK 1971: 103.
652
Cf. KÖSTER 1957: 45-50.
653
GREGORY 2003: 74.
654
‘Steht Ignatius auf dem Boden des urchristlichen Erhöhungskerigmas. Von einem Zwischenzustand
Jesu nach der Auferstehung, der mit einer sichtbaren Himmelfahrt schloß, scheint er nichts zu wissen.
Sollte er aber das Lukasevangelium gekannt haben, so ist auffälliger, daß er der lukanischen Konzeption
in seinen Briefen keinerlei Platz einräumt.’ LOHFINK 1971: 104.
655
HOLMES 2007: 283.
656
ZWIEP 1997: 123.
657
GREGORY (2003: 314), after analysing the possibility of a dependence on Acts, concludes by saying:
‘Therefore it does not seem possible to adduce Polycarp as a witness to the knowledge and use of Acts,
although of course the possibility that he knew Acts cannot be excluded.’
95
and the Ascension are dated on the same day, on the eighth day (Easter Sunday): 658
‘This is why we spend the eighth day in celebration, the day on which Jesus both arose
from the dead and, after appearing again, ascended into heaven.’ 659

Leslie William Barnard writes that the author of Barn 15:9 linked the Ascension (and
the post-resurrection appearances) to the resurrection without any consideration of the
chronological interval between them. 660 Zwiep, however, gives a better explanation:
‘The “ascension” in the sequence “resurrection-manifestation-ascension” is not an
Entrückung (in concreto, the visible ascension of Acts 1:9) but a heavenly journey,
which portrays Christ’s victory over death in a single continuous movement from
resurrection via a heavenly journey (φανερωθεὶς may be taken as “manifested to the
heavenly powers”, cf. 1Tim 3:16 ὤφθη ἀγγέλοις!) to heaven.’ 661 The celebration of the
Ascension on the same day with the resurrection is thus part of the primitive exaltation
kerygma (cf. Lk 24:51; John 20:17; EpAp 51; EvPe 56, etc.). 662 According to Lohfink
(who in this matter follows Helmut Köster) the text of Barn 15 is probably dependent on
Lk 24, or at least on a source common to both. 663 On the other hand, Parsons sees no
dependence on Luke-Acts at all and suggests that Barn 15:9 reflects an independent
tradition. 664 Yet Gregory agrees with Zwiep’s opinion saying that ‘this text is better
construed as a reference to Christ’s manifestation in the heavenly world [and this]

658
LOHFINK (1971: 121) argues that ‘nicht der Ostersonntag, sondern ein späterer Sonntag sei hier als Tag
der Himmelfahrt angenomen.’ However, this view cannot be sustained as long as, according to Barn 15:9,
on the eighth day not only the Ascension, but also the resurrection and the appearances happened.
659
HOLMES 2007: 429.
660
BARNARD 1968: 106-107.
661
ZWIEP 1997: 143.
662
‘What we have here is a reminiscence of the original Easter kerygma, in which Jesus’ resurrection was
understood in terms of his heavenly exaltation. Barnabas, then, moves entirely within the sphere of the
primitive Christian exaltation kerygma and cannot be taken as proof of a pre-Lukan rapture (visible
ascension) tradition.’ ZWIEP 1997: 191. Cf. LARRAÑAGA 1938: 498-509.
663
‘Die Möglichkeit, daß die auffälligen Übereinstimmungen zwischen Lk 24 und Barn 15 vielleicht doch
durch eine gemeinsame ältere Tradition mit Ostertermin bedingt sind, kann nicht ganz ausgeschlossen
warden.’ LOHFINK 1071: 125. Cf. KÖSTER 1957: 148: ‘Aus alledem folgt eindeutig, daß die Erwährung
der Himmelfahrt erst sehr spat auftaucht, und zwar offenbar erstmalig in bekenntnisähnlichen
Formulierungen, in denen, wie in den späteren kirchlichen Bekenntnissen, die Angabe einer Zeitspanne
zwischen Auferstehung und Himmelfahrt fehlt. Die wahrscheinlichste Erklärung für Barn. 15:9 ist
demnach, daß er von solchen Gemeindebekenntnissen abhängig ist, in denen Auferstehung und
Himmelfahrt einfach hintereinander genannt waren. Sehr unwahrscheinlich ist die Vermutung, Barn. habe
sich den Zusammenfall beider Ereignisse nach dem Luk.-Evangelium ausgerechnet.’
664
‘The lack of any firm evidence for a literary dependence of Barnabas on Luke-Acts leads to the
conclusion that, in fact, Barnabas reflects an ascension tradition of independent stature. This tradition
may be a common, older one from which both Barnabas and Luke draw, but there is no convincing
argument that one (Barnabas) was derived from the other (Luke).’ PARSONS 1987: 147.
96
provides a better explanation than that of either Lohfink or Parsons however, which
means in turn that Barnabas cannot be accepted as evidence of a pre-Lukan visible
ascension tradition.’ 665

In conclusion to the analysis of reception of the Ascension in the writings of the

Apostolic Fathers, it is difficult to establish whether these authors draw on Lukan
traditions or on common sources. Zwiep concludes affirming that ‘it cannot be
demonstrated positively that there was ever a rapture narrative before Luke’ but also
that ‘this is not to say that Luke has “invented” the ascension.’ 666

4.2.2 The Ante-Nicene Fathers

Analysing the doctrine and interpretation of the Ascension event in the pre-Nicene
Church, Davies observes that ‘there is sufficient evidence to make it plain that both
Jewish and pagan assailants of Christianity were not unaware of its teaching concerning
the Ascension, and for this reason Justin Martyr and, later, Tertullian and Origen,
sought to defend it against attack. The arguments they propounded are scarcely self-
consistent when taken together, but as separate argument ad hominem they doubtless
had their weight.’ 667

The most important witness to the Ascension in the second century is Justin the
Martyr (c. 103-165). 668 He probably draws on Luke’s accounts as the parallels between
his descriptions and Luke-Acts accounts are striking. Both in First Apology and in the
Dialogues, Justin makes extensive use of the Ascension, as a separate event from the
resurrection, to confirm the bodily resurrection and humanity of Christ. 669 Also, in one
extant fragment from his lost treatise On the Resurrection he records that ‘when He had
thus shown them that there is truly a resurrection of the flesh, wishing to show them this
also, that it is not impossible for flesh to ascend into heaven (as He had said that our
dwelling-place is in heaven), “He was taken up into heaven while they beheld,” as He

665
GREGORY 2003: 290.
666
ZWIEP 1997: 192.
667
DAVIES 1958: 71.
668
DAVIES 1958: 71: ‘The fullest witness to the Ascension is provided by Justin Martyr.’
669
Cf. Apol. 1, 21; 31; 42; 45; 46; 50; 51; 54; Dial. 17, 1; 32,3; 34,2; 36,5; 38,1; 39,7; 63,1; 82,1; 85,1-2;
108,2; 126,1; 132,1.
97
was in the flesh.’ 670 As Gregory observes, ‘Justin Martyr refers frequently to the
ascension, and it appears to have been central to his understanding of Jesus.’ 671

In Apol. 1,50 he writes that when Christ ‘had risen from the dead and appeared to them
[the disciples], and had taught them to read the prophecies, in which all these things
were predicted as coming to pass, and when they had seen Him ascending into heaven,
and had believed, and received power which he had sent from there, and went to every
race of men and women, they taught these things and were called Apostles.’ 672 In this
passage Justin describes a visible Ascension, 673 undoubtedly distinguished from the
resurrection through the mention of the post-resurrection appearances. Also, it shows
his use of the OT prophecies which he sees accomplished in Christ. 674 According to
Gregory (who follows Lohfink in this respect) Apol. 1,50 provides strong evidence that
Justin was familiar to and drawn on Lukan Ascension accounts but, however, he
remains prudent in this matter. 675

Justin also makes explicit reference to the Ascension in his creedal statement from Apol.
1, 21, saying: ‘And when we say also that the Word, who is the First-begotten of God,
was born for us without sexual union, Jesus Christ our teacher, and that He was crucified
and died and rose again and ascended into heaven…’ 676 As Davies observes, ‘this same
formula, in almost identical words, is to be found repeated in no fewer than seven other

670
JUSTIN MARTYR, Fragments of the Lost Work of Justin on the Resurrection 9, in ANCL 2: 352.
671
GREGORY 2003: 287; cf. LARRAÑAGA 1938: 503-505.
672
JUSTIN MARTYR, Apol. 1, 50, in BARNARD 1997: 58.
673
‘Hier ist nun allerdings so eindeutig von einer Himmelfahrt vor den Augen der Apostel die Rede, daß
alle anderen Belege bei Justin von dieser Stelle aus interpretiert warden müssen.’ LOHFINK, Die
Himmelfahrt Jesu, p. 110. Cf. BARRETT 1994: 42.
674
Justin associates the psalms 68 and 110 with the Ascension (Apol. 1, 45; Dial. 32.6; 36.5; 39.4; 56.14;
83.1; 87.6; 127.5), traditionally regarded as prophecies to Chris’s exaltation. To these he adds three other
psalms: 19 (Dial. 69.3), 24 (Apol. 1, 51; Dial. 36; 85.1) and 47 (Dial. 32.2-7). Cf. DAVIES 1958: 72-73;
GREGORY 2003: 287; ZWIEP 1997: 120 n. 2.
675
‘This passage has been used to suggest that Justin knew Acts but it might also (or instead) presuppose
Luke 24:50-53, at least in its longer form. Perhaps in favour of Justin’s presupposing Luke is the
continuity between his account of Jesus’ post-resurrection teaching and his account of the ascension,
although of course Justin could draw on Luke 24 and Acts 1 together. Perhaps in favour of Justin’s
presupposing Acts is his statement that when the Apostles had seen Jesus ascend, had believed and had
received power they went to every race of men and women. This is explicit in Acts, but each element
might be considered to be implicit in the longer form of Luke 24:50-53.’ GREGORY 2003: 288 (cf. also
318-321). Cf. LOHFINK 1971: 110.
676
JUSTIN MARTYR, Apol. 1, 21, in BARNARD 1997: 37.
98
passages in his works, and there is no reason to doubt that his represents a faithful
reproduction of the primitive kerygma in which the Ascension had a necessary place.’ 677

Justin seems to have used the same exaltation tradition as Luke, or even used his works,
being the first second century author known to us in whose thought the Ascension event
occupies a definite place. 678

Melito of Sardis (d. 180) mentions the Ascension, citing Ps 68:33 and the Song of
Solomon 2:8: ‘The ascent of the Lord – the raising up of man, who is taken from earth to
heaven. In the Psalm: “Who ascended above the heaven of heavens to the east” [Ps
68:33] ... The transition of the Lord—His assumption of our flesh, through which by His
birth, His death, His resurrection, His ascent into heaven, He made transitions, so to say.
In the Song of Songs: “Behold, He comes, leaping upon the mountains, bounding over
the hills.”’ 679 [Song of Sol 2:8] In Melito’s view the Ascension was the normal ending
of Christ’s mission on earth, and by sitting of the right hand of the Father he brought our
nature into heaven. 680 The Ascension is mentioned also in his confession of faith found
in Peri Pascha 104. 681

Irenaeus, bishop of Lugdunum (c. 130/140-c. 202), commenting on the ending of Mark
and citing the Ps 110.1, writes: ‘Also, towards the conclusion of his Gospel, Mark says:
“So then, after the Lord Jesus had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and
sited on the right hand of God;” confirming what had been spoken by the prophet: “The
Lord said to my Lord, Sit Thou on My right hand, until I make Thy foes Thy

677
DAVIES 1958: 72; cf. BEHR 2001: 101-102.
678
‘Er ist überhaupt innerhalb der uns erhalten gebliebennen Literatur des 2. Jahrhunderts der erste Autor,
bei dem die Himmelfahrt einen festen Platz im Christuskerygma einnimmt und bei dem sich mit
Sicherheit sagen läßt, daß er die lukanische Himmelfahrtkonzeption übernommen hat. Beachten wir nun
angesichts dieses Sachverhalts Folgendes: Justin is zugleich der erste Autor, bei dem sich eine Kenntnis
und Benutzung des lukanischen Doppelwerks wirklich nachweisen läßt. Beides steht natürlich in einem
inneren Zusammenhang: Die lukanische Himmelfahrtskonzeption setzt sich zu genau dem Zeitpunkt
durch, an dem sich auch die lukanischen Schriften durchsetzen und zitiert warden.’ LOHFINK 1971: 110.
679
MELITO OF SARDIS, Fragments from the Oration on Our Lord’s Passion, in ANCL 22: 137.
680
DAVIES 1958: 74.
681
STEWART-SYKES 2001: 66.
99
footstool.”’ 682 Irenaeus, as many other authors before him, situates the Ascension in
relation to the resurrection on the same day, Easter Day. 683

Irenaeus does not quote the Lukan Ascension accounts but clearly uses them in his
battle against the Gnostic heresies. 684 He was most certainly familiar with the works of
Justin and followed him in preserving ‘certain quasi-credal statements in a more or less
stereotyped form, containing distinct references to the Ascension.’ 685 Irenaeus’ intention
was to argue against docetic and Gnostic heresies, which affirmed that Christ’s descent
and ascent were invisible. In his Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching 83-85, the
author extensively discusses the Ascension in terms of exaltation of a new man:
‘Because the Word was made flesh, He was visible in his ascension; and, when the
powers saw Him, the angels below cried out to those who were on firmament: Lift up
your gates; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting gates, that the King of glory may come
in.’ 686 Because Christ bears both natures he is recognised by the angelic powers as
being as visible to the apostles as he is to the heavenly creatures. 687 Following
Lohfink’s view, Zwiep emphasises that ‘it is only as late as Justin (Apol 1,50) and
Irenaeus (AdvHaer I 10,1; II 32,3; III 10,6; 12,1.5; 16,8; 17,2; V 31,2; Dem 41; 83; 84)
that the Lukan conception is carried through, albeit parallel to the exaltation kerygma,
which persisted into the fifth century AD.’ 688

In the works of Tertullian (155-c. 220) the Ascension is connected with the
eschatological expectation: ‘Who then in so untimely, so unripe, a sort, has summoned
the Lord, now at the right hand of God, to shake terribly the earth, as Isaiah says, when,
I suppose, it is still intact? Who has already subdued Christ’s enemies under his feet, as

682
IRENAEUS, Against Heresies III 10.6, in ANCL 5: 287. In AH I 10.1, Irenaeus gives the fullest
description of the faith which was received from the apostles in form of a creedal statement and includes
the bodily ascension. Cf. BEHR 2001: 35.
683
‘Irénée situe l’Ascension dans la trame des événements de Pâques. Insérée dans le temps et dans
l’espace, elle implique le corps du Seigneur et s’inscrit dans une géographie précise : c’est sur le mont des
Oliviers qu’elle a eu lieu, selon la prophétie de David dans le psaume 67 (68).’ CHAIGNON 2008: 119.
684
‘Lukas wollte in seinem Doppelwerk den Nachweis erbringen, daß die apostolische Verkündigung von
Jesus bis in die eigene Zeit in ungebrochener Kontinuität weitergegeben wordan war. Irenäus nimmt diese
Zielsetzung auf und arbeitet sie teologisch weiter aus. So ist es nun folgerichtig, daß er auch die
Konzeption der Himmelfahrt von Lukas übernimmt und mit besonderer Betonung immer wieder von der
nach der Auferstehung vor den Augen der Apostel geschehenen Auffahrt Jesu spricht.’ LOHFINK 1971:
110-111.
685
DAVIES 1958: 74. Cf. IRENAEUS, Against Heresies III 6.2, in ANCL 5: 270.
686
IRENAEUS, On the Apostolic Preaching 84, in MACKENZIE 2002: 24.
687
MACKENZIE 2002: 216-218.
688
ZWIEP 1997: 23; cf. LOHFINK 1971: 111.
100
David says, as though swifter than the Father, while still every assembly of the
proletariat cries out for “Christians to the lion”? Who has perceived Jesus coming down
from heaven in like manner as the apostles saw him going up, according to the angels’
decree? Until this present day no tribe unto tribe have smitten their breasts, recognizing
him whom they pierced: no one yet has welcomed Elijah, no one yet has fled from
Antichrist, no one yet has wept for the death of Babylon.’ 689

Tertullian’s primary interest was to reject the heresies and defend the orthodox Christian
belief. The Ascension provides arguments for the reality of the (bodily) Resurrection
and offers the premise for a discussion regarding Christ’s status in heaven. 690

Moreover, the session of Jesus in His incarnate nature at the right hand of God
represents a guarantee of the resurrection of our flesh: ‘Jesus is even now sitting there at
the right hand of the Father, Man albeit God, the last Adam albeit the primal Word, flesh
and blood albeit purer than ours, yet the same in both the substance and the form in
which he ascended, in like manner also will descend, as the angels affirm, recognizable
in fact by those who have wounded him.’ 691

‘In his De Resurrectione Carnis (210-12), which is a companion volume to the De

Carne Christi, Tertullian opposes four Gnostic sects, those of Marcion, Apelles,
Basilides and Valentinus, whose addiction to docetism has led them to deny the reality
of Christ’s flesh and of its Resurrection. The Ascension again provides Tertullian with a
weapon in his onslaught on this position.’ 692

When speaking about the distinction between the persons of the Holy Trinity, Tertullian
stresses that: ‘The Son ascended into the higher parts of heaven, as he did also descend
into the inner parts of the earth. This is he who is seated at the right hand of the Father,
not the Father at his own right hand. This is he whom Stephen sees, when he is being
stoned, still standing at the right hand of God, as thenceforth to sit, until the Father do
put all enemies under his feet. This is he who is also to come again above the clouds of

689
TERTULLIAN, On the Resurrection 22, in EVANS 1960: 61-63.
690
‘The exigencies of controversy equally influenced the majority of his references to the Ascension,
which he does not so much seek to expound as to use as a weapon in his anti-heretical armoury.’ DAVIES
1958: 82.
691
TERTULLIAN, On the Resurrection 51, in EVANS 1960: 149.
692
DAVIES 1958: 83.
101
heaven in like fashion as also he ascended.’ 693 The author seeks to defend the orthodoxy
from the Modalist or Patripassian heresies, demonstrating that the Ascension proves
once again the distinction between the Father and the Son. 694 Furthermore, Tertullian
points out that the most appropriate day for baptism is on the feast of Pentecost, because
this period also incorporates both the joy of the resurrection and of the Ascension. 695

Origen (185-253), interpreting Jn 20:17, shows his understanding of the Ascension as

united with the resurrection (but still two distinct events): ‘For what occurred on the
first day in the paradise of God belonged to the resurrection; it was also a part of
resurrection when he appeared and said, “Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended
to the father”; but the resurrection was completed when he went to the Father.’ 696 And
again, on the same pericope, he writes: ‘But after he had destroyed his enemies through
his passion, the Lord, who is mighty in battle and strong [cf. Ps 23:8], needing the
cleansing for his manly deeds which can be given to him by the Father alone, prevents
Mary from touching him saying, “Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended to the
Father. But go and say to my brethren, «I am going to my Father and your Father, and to
my God and your God».”’ 697

Origen makes extensive use of the Allegorical method of interpretation and, as Davies
observes, ‘the Ascension was not spared that allegorization which Origen employed so
zealously in his exposition of the Scriptures.’ 698 ‘But since, as we said before, after he
had performed manly deeds against his adversaries he needed to wash “his robe in wine,
and his garment in the blood of the grapes” [cf. Gn 49:11], he went up to the Father, the
husbandman of the true vine, that, having washed there after the ascent to the height
when he led captivity captive, he might descend bearing various gifts. Among these
gifts were the tongues as of fire which were distributed to the apostles, and the holy

693
TERTULLIAN, Against Praxeas 30, EVANS 1948: 178-179. See also: NOVATIAN, The Trinity 26, in
DESIMONE 1974: 90-92.
694
DAVIES 1958: 85-86.
695
TERTULLIAN, On Baptism 19, in EVANS 1964: 41: ‘After that, Pentecost is a most auspicious period for
arranging baptisms, for during it our Lord’s resurrection was several times made known among the
disciples, and the grace of the Holy Spirit first given, and the hope of our Lord’s coming made evident:
because it was at that time, when he had been received back into heaven, that angels said to the apostles
that he would so come in like manner as he had also gone up into heaven, namely, at Pentecost.’
696
ORIGEN, Commentary on the Gospel according to John 10.245, in HEINE 1989: 309.
697
ORIGEN, Commentary on the Gospel according to John 6.287, in HEINE 1989: 246.
698
DAVIES 1958: 91.
102
angels who will be present in their every act and will deliver them.’ 699 In a fragment of
his commentary on Luke, Origen interprets the blessing of Christ, comparing this
gesture with Moses rising up his hands: ‘So, if someone has his hands down towards
earthly things, he does not intend to bless anyone. So, too, the hands of Moses did not
help the people when they were down, but when they were raised up. The raising up of
the Saviour’s hands was a symbol of this. By his actions on behalf of man, he saved the
believers. Perhaps, therefore, everyone who is raised up by his deeds has been crucified,
as Paul wrote: “I am crucified to the world and the world to me” [Gal 6:14]. That is to
say, the word about the world has been conceived, thought, and raised on high, and no
longer lies below... But, the Lord also lifts up his hands in another way, and bestows
power on the disciples through his blessing.’ 700

Novatian (c. 200-258) mentions the Ascension insisting on Christ’s two natures: ‘In the
same manner, that He, as Man, ascended into heaven, as God, he first descended from
heaven. In the same manner that he, as Man, goes to the Father, so as a Son obedient to
His Father shall he descend from the Father.’ 701 The author connects the ascension of
the Son to the Father with the incarnation. Christ descended from the Father as God and
took our human nature, and ascended as Man and God back to heaven, to the Father.
Novatian uses the Ascension to defend the Trinitarian doctrine by showing how the Son
incarnate possesses two natures and remains at the same time fully God in heaven. 702
He argued against the Adoptionistic and Nestorian heresies by proving that Jesus is both
God and Man, and that the Ascension represents an argument for his divinity (The
Trinity 11). 703

Lactantius (c. 240-c. 320) interprets the Ascension by making use of the early tradition,
citing the prophecy from Dan 7:13: ‘After His preaching of the Gospel and His Name to
the disciples was completed, He withdrew Himself suddenly, and the clouds took Him
into heaven of the fortieth day after His Passion, just as Daniel had showed would
happen when he said: “Lo, one like the son of man coming in the clouds of heaven. And
he came even to the Ancient of days.” [Dan 7:13] His disciples, however, dispersing

699
ORIGEN, Commentary on the Gospel according to John 6.292, in HEINE 1989: 247.
700
ORIGEN, Fragment 257 (on Luke 24:50), LIENHARD 1996: 227.
701
NOVATIAN, The Trinity 11.8, in DESIMONE 1974: 49.
702
‘Novatian’s sober theology, a not untypical product of the Western mind with its essentially practical
character, fell short of the wide range of the Alexandrian speculation.’ DAVIES 1958: 90.
703
DESIMONE 1970: 82.
103
through the provinces, made foundations of the Church everywhere, themselves
performing great and almost incredible miracles in the name of God, their Master. For
as He was departing, He had instructed them in the virtue and power, whereby the plan
of the new message might be established and confirmed.’ 704 And again, in another
place, adding the Ps 110:1 to explain the glorification of the Son of God: ‘Therefore,
after His resurrection He went into Galilee, and again assembled His disciples, who had
fled through fear; and having given them commands which He wished to be observed,
and having arranged for the preaching of the Gospel throughout the whole world, He
breathed into them the Holy Spirit, and gave them the power of working miracles, that
they might act for the welfare of men as well by deeds as words; and then at length, on
the fortieth day, He returned to His Father, being carried up into a cloud. The prophet
Daniel [Dan 7:13] had long before shown this, saying, “I saw in the night vision, and,
behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the
Ancient of days; and they who stood beside Him brought Him near before Him. And
there was given Him a kingdom, and glory, and dominion, and all people, tribes, and
languages shall serve Him; and His power is an everlasting one, which shall not pass
away, and His kingdom that which shall not be destroyed.” Also David in the 109th
Psalm [LXX]: “The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit Thou at my right hand, until I make
Thine enemies Thy footstool”.’ 705

The great Church historian Eusebius of Caesarea (263-339/340), in whose thought the
Ascension occupies a central place as the climax of the Saviour’s earthly life, 706 records
that Christ ‘performed and suffered such things as were in accord with the prophecies
which foretold that One who was both man and God would come to dwell in the world,
as the performer of miraculous deeds, and that he would be made manifest to all the
Gentiles as the teacher of the worship of the Father, and that the marvel of His birth and
His new teaching and the wonder of his deeds, and, in addition to these, the manner of
His death and resurrection from the dead, and, above all, His divine ascension into
heaven would also be made manifest. Thus Daniel the Prophet, under the influence of
the divine Spirit, saw His kingdom in the end and was inspired thus to describe the
vision of God in human fashion: “For I beheld,” he says “till thrones were placed, and
the Ancient of days sat: his garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like
704
LACTANTIUS, The Divine Institutes 4.21, in MCDONALD 1964: 300-301.
705
LACTANTIUS, The Epitome of the Divine Institutes 47, in ANCL 22: 131-132.
706
Cf. LARRAÑAGA 1938: 515-522.
104
clean wool: his throne like flames of fire: the wheels of it like a burning fire. A swift
stream of fire issued forth before him: thousand times a hundred thousand stood before
him: the judgement sat, and the books were opened.” [Dan 7:9-10] And next he says: “I
beheld, and lo, one like the son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and he came
even to the Ancient of days: and he was presented before him. And to him was given
power, and glory, and a kingdom, and all peoples, tribes, and tongues shall serve him.
His power is an everlasting power that shall not pass away: and his kingdom shall not
be destroyed.”’ [Dan 7:13-14] 707 The Ascension, which in Eusebius’ thought represents
the culmination and the fulfilment of all OT messianic prophecies, confirms Christ’s
divinity and his glory. 708

In conclusion, the treatment of the Ascension in the pre-Nicene Christian writers is

almost always connected with the session ad dexteram Dei and used with apologetic
purposes. All the authors discussed above include the Ascension event in their quasi-
creedal formulae and only briefly try to interpret it. However, three writers are of
special interest in the discussion of interpretation: Novatian associates the Ascension of
Christ with the doctrine of incarnation, Irenaeus incorporates it into his theory of
recapitulation, and Origen, making extensive use of the allegorical method, emphasises
that a too-literal interpretation of the Lukan narratives of the Ascension could lead to a
false understanding of the event per se. 709

707
EUSEBIUS PAMPHILI, Ecclesiastical History 1.2, in DEFERRARI 1953: 45.
708
‘Anche senza aver di mira avversari determinati, i Padri volentieri argomentano dall’ascensione di
Cristo la sua divinità. Così Eusebio di Cesarea (Hist. Eccl. I 2, 23) scorge nell’ascensione il coronamento
degli eventi in cui si compiono le profezie riguardanti il Cristo.’ PELLEGRINO 1954: 60.
709
DAVIES 1958: 94.
105
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS AND FINAL REMARKS

In the present dissertation I investigated the Ascension of the Messiah as presented by

the Evangelist Luke in his two writings. The introduction deals with the history of the
research on the subject and the proposed methodology. In identifying the sources used
by the author to describe the event, in the second section I started with an analysis of the
Jewish writings, both canonical (Enoch in Gen 5; Elijah in 2Kgs 2, Sir 48 and Ps 110)
and non-canonical from the Hellenistic-Roman period. The conclusion of this
discussion shows that Jewish rapture traditions shared common elements such as a
period of instruction and a last discourse before the translation into heaven, the
ascension usually necessitates an eschatological function to be fulfilled and that the
ascended ones do not experience death. From the biblical accounts of Enoch and
Elijah’s departures, various ascension stories developed within Jewish mystic and
apocalyptic movements. This Jewish rapture tradition seems to represent the base of the
Lukan ascension description in Lk 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11, analysed in the third
chapter of the present dissertation.

Through a textual and literary analysis I aimed to demonstrate that Christ’s Ascension
cannot be regarded as simply the last appearance to the disciples and that the different
elements presented by Luke (the last instruction, the blessing, the cloud, the angels, etc.)
are meant to transmit the glorified status of the resurrected one and his mission.
Furthermore, I proposed a theological interpretation based on the patristic exegesis. In
comparison with the Jewish raptures the Ascension of Christ is clearly different: the
condition of the ascended ones is only temporary whereas Christ’s exaltation into
heaven represents his return to the Father; the Jewish rapti are granted the privilege of
sitting in heaven whereas Christ, the Son of God, sits at the right hand of the Father
from eternity; God raises only the spirit of the elevated ones whereas Christ exalts the
whole human nature and, thus, makes deification possible for humanity. This
interpretation resides in the theological significance of the Ascension event, the last
recorded action of Jesus on earth. Luke emphasises its great importance through the
double description and by placing it at the centre of his writings. It represents the
culmination of Christ’s work of Redemption and the generative motif for the
106
commencement of his Church. The Holy Spirit comes in the world only after the Son of
God returns to the Father in heaven. In the end of the third chapter, I discussed the
apparent inconsistencies between the two Lukan accounts, showing that the distinct
purpose and function of each pericope within Luke’s narrative lead to their specific
place and the different approach of the same event. In the Gospel’s finale the Ascension
is implicitly described whereas in the introduction of Acts the author explicitly
describes the departure of Christ into heaven. He clearly describes a literal ascension
and, as Dunn observes, he ‘intended to do so.’ 710 In Luke’s view, the Ascension is both
a condition for the gift of the Spirit and an act of vindication. In describing the
Ascension, the author was inspired primarily by the OT story of Elijah’s rapture (Elijah
himself is seen as a precursor of Christ), but it is equally clear that he also charged it
with a different significance and greater importance. The dependence in form of Luke-
Acts on the Jewish rapture traditions is very probable, but that Luke presented the
Ascension as a mere literary dvice to bring closure to Christ’s earthly mission is highly
arguable.

The evidence of the patristic interpretation of the Ascension (as a part of the apostolic
kerygma) allows us to defend the historicity of the event and dismiss the assumption
that Christ’s exaltation is merely a myth. This evidence of the Christian writings in the
pre-Nicene period was presented and analysed in the fourth chapter, showing that the
early authors mentioned the Ascension in all their ‘Rule of faith’ confessional (creed-
like) statements and even tried to interpret it as one of the most important elements in
the redemptive work of Christ. Also, the bodily resurrection is confirmed by the
physical elevation of Christ and the visible Ascension is affirmed not only by the Lukan
accounts, but also by the early Christian kerygma.

However, it can be observed that early Christianity saw Christ’s resurrection and
departure in unity, as two aspects (or moments) of the exaltation or glorification of the
Son of God. This view influenced the liturgical celebration of the feast of Ascension.
Consequently, the commemoration of Jesus’ return to the Father was placed either on
Easter Sunday or at the end of the fifty days (Pentecost). Both these traditions reflect the
unity of the Pentecostal period, as an interval in which the joy of the resurrection was
celebrated within the early Christian Church. On the one hand, the testimonies of

710
DUNN 2001: 312.
107
Barnabas 15:9, the Apology of Aristides 2, the Gospel of Peter 9:35-39, the Epistle of
the Apostles 51, and the Testament of Benjamin 9:3 represent a tradition that links the
Ascension with Easter Day. But on the other hand, another tradition affirms the
observance of the Ascension at the end of Pentecost. This independent tradition,
probably much later than the former, is to be found in the Syriac Doctrine (or Teaching)
of the Apostles, 711 Eusebius, 712 and Itinerarium Egeriae 43. 713 The celebration of the
Ascension on Pentecost was probably introduced in the third century. Although the
Canon 43 of the Council of Elvira (A.D. 300) shows that ‘the bridegroom was taken
away’ forty days after he was raised from the grave, 714 it was not until the fourth
century that the Ascension began to be celebrated as a separate Feast – on the fortieth
day after the resurrection, the time of the event as described in Acts 1:3. 715 According to
Jean Daniélou, the first mention of the Ascension observance on the day recorded by
Luke seems to be in a Homily of Gregory of Nyssa (388). 716 From this point onwards
the feast of the bodily Ascension of Jesus into heaven is celebrated separately from the
Resurrection or Pentecost. From tradition, the Ascension is seen as one of the great
feasts in the Christian liturgical calendar and, until the present day, the Christian Church
commemorates the Lord’s return to heaven on a Thursday, the fortieth day from Easter
Sunday. 717

Also, the reception of the Ascension within early Christian thought led to the
crystallisation of the doctrine. Although the terminology is sometimes different, the

711
In the ninth Canon it is written: ‘Again the Apostles appointed: At the completion of fifty days after
his resurrection, make the commemoration of his ascension to his glorious Father.’ Doctrine of the
Apostles, in CURETON 1864: 27. Cf. WITAKOWSKI 1987: 161-171.
712
In his Vita Constantini he records that the Emperor’s death coincided with the celebration of Christ’s
Ascension, on the afternoon of Pentecost day: ‘Each of these events took place during the greatest
festival, the utterly sacred and holy Pentecost, honoured with seven weeks and sealed up with a single
day, during which divine words describe the ascension into Heaven of the universal Saviour and the
descent of the Holy Spirit upon mankind.’ Life of Constantine 4.64(1), in CAMERON; HALL 1999: 178.
713
Cf. DAVIES 1954: 93-100.
714
TALLEY 1986: 62-63; DAVIES 1958: 192-198.
715
‘The commemoration of the Lord’s Ascension on the 40th day after Easter (in accordance with Luke’s
Acts) came into existence at the end of the fourth century or beginning of the fifth century.’ GOUDOEVER
1961: 199; cf. LOHFINK 1971: 137-146.
716
‘Par ailleurs les seules indications certaines de l’existence de la fête de l’Ascension au quarantième
jour après Pâques sont postérieures à 390. Le sermon de Grégoire, qui paraît en relation avec l’apparition
de cette fête ne saurait être très antérieur. Nous pensons donc pouvoir le fixer avec une approximation
aussi grande que possible au quarantième jour après Pâques de 388.’ DANIELOU 1970: 666.
717
In some catholic and orthodox dioceses the Ascension Feast is held on the following Sunday for
pastoral reasons.
108
departure of Christ is included in all the early Christian creeds and confessions of
faith. 718 The Nicene-Constantinopolitan Creed (381) states that our Lord Jesus Christ
‘ascended into heaven, and is seated on the right hand of the Father.’ And this reality, of
the glorification of the Son of Man and the exalted status of the human nature was
preserved by the Christian tradition through its Creeds and Confessions of faith.

Jesus Christ, the Messiah, did ascend into heaven and the meaning of his Ascension is
of great profundity. It cannot be regarded as a mere finale of his life and mission on
earth; it is more than a spectacular wonder and a well-written story by Luke. The
Ascension was necessary for reassuring the audience that the resurrected one did not
die, that the living Jesus sits in flesh at the right hand of the Father. 719

Through the Ascension, the world is not abandoned, as Christ continues his work
through the Holy Spirit. So that the Holy Spirit could be sent to earth, it was necessary
for Christ to Ascend to the Father. As Oscar Cullmann affirms, ‘after Jesus has left the
earth and ascended to heaven, he will not abandon the earth. On the contrary – and this
is the primary idea of these speeches – his action on earth will then be much more
effective than it was during the time of his incarnation.’ 720 Without doubt the Ascension
can be regarded as potentially one of the most important episodes in the life of Jesus
Christ and one of the central events in the History of Redemption.

718
The majority of authors used the active form of ‘He ascended,’ whereas some rendered the passive,
‘He was taken up.’ Cf. DAVIES 1958: 95-97.
719
Cf. CALVIN, The Acts of the Apostles 1:9.
720
CULLMANN 1963: 232-233.
109
 APPENDICES

Excursus 1: Hekhalot Literature and Merkabah Mysticism

The Jewish Hekhalot literature refers to that body of esoteric texts that describe mystical
visions of heavens and ecstatic journeys through the seven palaces or heavens to the
chariot-throne of God (merkava or merkabah). 721 This literature was produced after the
distruction of the Second Temple (A.D. 70), sometime between late antiquity and the
early Middle Ages, and it is based on Ezekiel’s vision of the chariot (Ezek. 1:4-26).
Some early Hekhalot traditions witnesses are found in the Dead Sea Scrolls (as The
Song of the Sabath Sacrifice) dated from the Hasmonean to the Herodian period. 722

The Hekhalot writings are literary sections of the Maasei Merkavah and account the
mystical ascents into heaven, usually with the purpose to gain insight into Torah. The
Hekhalot tradition is based primarily on the Chariot vision of Ezekiel (Ezek. 1) and the
Temple vision of Isaiah (Is. 6). The extant texts are included into four principal works,
written between the third and the ninth century: Hekhalot Zutartey (‘The Lesser
Palaces’), Hekhalot Rabbati 723 (‘The Greater Palaces’), Ma’aseh Merkabah (‘Account
of the Chariot’) and Sepher Hekhalot (‘The Book of Palaces’ or 3 Enoch). 724 Michael D.
Swartz concludes stating that ‘whatever the origins of this remarkable literature, it is
important not only for the history of Jewish mysticism, but the history of Judaism in late
antiquity as well’. 725

721
‘Since the nineteenth century, scholars have argued that in the rabbinic period small circles of Jews
cultivated a type of visionary mysticism that involved the cultivation of visions of the heavens and of
ecstatic journeys through the seven palaces (hekhalot) or layers of the celestial world to the throne-room
of God, where he is seated on his chariot-throne (merkava).’ SWARTZ 2006: 393.
722
4Q400-407 and 11Q17. FLETCHER-LOUIS (2002: 252) considers the Song of the Sabbath Sacrifice as ‘a
potentially early witness to the kind of religious experience later attested in the Hekhalot Literature’.
723
For an examination of ascension motifs in Hekhalot Rabbati, see: GOODER 2006: 145-150.
724
‘The narrators and protagonists are almost always three prominent rabbis of the Tannaitic era: Akiva
Ishmael, and Nehuniah ben HaQanah. The texts are clearly pseudepigraphic, written long after the
lifetimes of these men, although it is not impossible that some of the Hekhalot traditions go back to their
teachings.’ DAVILA 2001: 3.
725
SWARTZ 2006: 420.
110
The Third Book of Enoch (Hekhalot)

3 Enoch 726 is an apocryphal writing probably composed in the fifth or the sixth century
A.D. related to Merkabah (or Merkavah) literature. It was attributed to Rabbi Ishmael,
the famous Palestinian scholar, who became a ‘High Priest’ after visions of ascension to
heaven (d. A.D. 132). 727 The third book of Enoch exists only in Hebrew and contains an
edition of a work from the Hekhalot tradition. 728 Even though 3 Enoch is not classified
as apocalyptic writing, the book is heavily influenced by the apocalyptic genre, showing
impressive relationships with 1 and 2 Enoch. 729 The main themes running through the
book of 3 Enoch are the ascension of Enoch into Heaven and his transfiguration into the
angel Metatron. P. Alexander stresses that 3 Enoch was composed through the
combination of many separate traditions, and this would be the reason for the
inconsistency and even contradictions in the compiled text. 730

The text presents the rapture story of Rabbi Ishmael carried into heaven, and guided
there by the angel Metatron (Enoch). 731 After the first two chapters of the Book, the
Enoch-Metatron piece begins. 732 The first chapter (Introduction) depicts the ascension
of Rabbi Ishmael to heaven to behold the vision of Merkabah (3En 3:1-3). Later on, in 3
Enoch 6:1, Enoch, the son of Jared, relates how and why God lifted him up to heaven
together with the Shekinah in a storm chariot:

R. Ishmael said: The angel Metatron, Prince of the Divine Presence, said to me:
When the Holy One, blessed be He, desired to bring me up (lift me up) to the height, He
sent me the PrinceʿAnapiʾel YHWH and he took me from their midst, before their very
eyes, and he conveyed (carried) me in great glory on a fiery chariot with fiery horses and

726
The book of 3 Enoch is also known as The Third Book of Enoch, The Book of the Palaces (Sefer
Hekhalot), The Book of Rabbi Ishmael the High Priest, The Revelation of Metatron, and The Hebrew
Book of Enoch.
727
EVANS 1992: 24.
728
‘Sefer Hekhalot, which is formally an apocalypse, reports the revelations of the angel Metatron to R.
Ishmael, the hero of many other Hekhalot works.’ HIMMELFARB 1991: 83.
729
OEGEMA 2001: 132.
730
ALEXANDER, OTP 1: 223-224.
731
In Gen. 5:24, ‘Metatron is translated Enoch who was taken up to heaven on account of his having led a
perfect life, serving the Holy One in truth. He is called the Great Scribe. This is evidently dependent upon
Enoch-Metatron traditions, possibly directly upon 3 Enoch, since it combines, as does the Enoch-
Metatron Piece, chh. 3-15, the functions of Scribe-Witness and only perfect Saint with reference to the
translated Enoch.’ ODEBERG 1973: 95.
732
3 Enoch is a composite work, written by a number of people over a prolonged period of time; chapters
3-15 represent the oldest and the most important part of the corpus. This part is referred as Enoch-
Metatron piece, or the Elevation of Metatron.
111
 glorious attendants, and he brought (lifted) me up with the Šhekinah to the heavenly
heights. 733

ʿAnapiʾel YHWH is an archangel, the same who punishes Metatron in 16:5. According
to Hekhalot Rabbati 23:1, he is one of the gatekeepers of the seventh palace; only the
highest archangels carry the tetragrammaton YHWH. 734 As Gooder observes, ‘the
purpose of the ascent seems to be for Ishmael to learn certain heavenly secrets such as
the origin of Metatron.’ 735

The same story of Enoch’s ascension on the wings of the Šhekinah is resubmitted with
little variations in the next chapter (7:1). 3 Enoch is closely related to 2 Enoch; ‘Enoch’s
ascent through the seven heavens to God’s throne, where he receives instruction from
the archangels in various mysteries, is parallel to Ishmael’s journey in 3 Enoch. The
transformation of Enoch provides the closest approximation, outside Merkabah
literature to Enoch’s transformation in 3 Enoch 3-15’. 736

Another short account of Enoch’s ascension can be found in the appendix to 3 Enoch
(48C:2), a text taken from the Alphabet of Aqiba 737, and attached later to the third book
of Enoch (A and B recensions). The verses 1-9, in the form of an acrostic on the first
letter of the Hebrew alphabet (ʾĀleph), recount the elevation of Enoch and his
transformation into the witness of God. This short report appears to be a summary of the
longer version of the elevation of Enoch; parallel to 3 Enoch 3-15.

733
3En. 6:1. Translated by ALEXANDER, OTP 1: 261.
734
Cited by ALEXANDER, OTP 1: 261 n. 6b.
735
GOODER 2006: 144.
736
ALEXANDER, OTP 1: 248.
737
The Alphabet of Aquiba is the title of a Midrash on the letters of the Hebrew alphabet. The first letter
(ʾĀleph) suggests the person of God.
112
Excursus 2: The Ascension in the Gospels According to Mark and John

2.1 The Ascension of Christ in the Gospel of Mark (16:19-20)

Ὁ μὲν οὖν κύριος Ἰησοῦς μετὰ τὸ 19 So then the Lord Jesus, after he had
λαλῆσαι αὐτοῖς ἀνελήμφθη εἰς τὸν spoken to them, was taken up into
οὐρανὸν καὶ ἐκάθισεν ἐκ δεξιῶν τοῦ heaven, and sat down at the right hand of
θεοῦ. God.
ἐκεῖνοι δὲ ἐξελθόντες ἐκήρυξαν 20 And they went forth and preached
πανταχοῦ, τοῦ κυρίου συνεργοῦντος καὶ everywhere, while the Lord worked with
τὸν λόγον βεβαιοῦντος διὰ τῶν them and confirmed the message by the
ἐπακολουθούντων σημείων. signs that attended it. [Amen.]

The passage in the NT which notes the Ascension of Christ closest to the description
from the Gospel of Luke (24:50-53) and the Acts of the Apostles (1:9-11) is that which
is part of the so called ‘longer ending’ of Mark’s Gospel (16:9-20). 738

The majority of Western theologians consider the Mk 16:9-20 passage to be a later

interpolation, by another author, which contains a summary of the events which
happened after the resurrection. 739 Brevard Childs argues that the longer ending
illustrates the reaction to the events described in Mk 16:1-8 and represents the natural
prolongation of the story. ‘The longer ending, in addition, functions as a commentary on
the first eight verses and plainly rules out interpreting the astonishment and awe of the
women in a positive fashion.’ 740

In the majority’s view, the conclusion of the Gospel of Mark (or pseudo-Mark) was
added at the beginning of the second century and composed on the basis of the other
synoptic gospels. 741 The main arguments would be the existence of some early
manuscripts (Codex Sinaiticus, Codex Vaticanus and some subsequent translations) in
which this ending lacks, as well as the internal witnesses (stylistic and linguistic

738
ZWIEP 1997: 131-132: ‘We have here a clear and unmistakable expression of Jesus’ ascension
(Entückung) understood in terms of his exaltation or session ad dexteram Dei.’
739
An exception is FARMER (1974), who affirms that, apart from v. 10, this ending (16:9-20) would
belong to the Evangelist Mark.
740
CHILDS 1984: 95.
741
METZGER 1983: 92.
113
problems). 742 Despite this, the longer ending gained canonical status at a very early
stage. Metzger explain this saying: ‘In short, it appears that the question of canonicity
pertains to the document qua document, and not to one particular form or version of that
document. Translated into modern terms, Churches today accept a wide variety of
contemporary versions as the canonical NT, though the versions differ not only as to
rendering but also with respect to the presence or absence of certain verses in several of
the books (besides the ending of Mark’s Gospel, other significant variations include
Luke 22:43-44, John 7:53-8:2, and Acts 8:37).’ 743

From a point of view of continuity, the vocabulary used by the author of the longer
ending is different from that used until Mk 16:8, fact which can be explained through
the newly approached themes. 744 Just as Paul Nadim Tarazi affirms, ‘the original text of
Mark contained no accounts of Jesus’ post-resurrection appearances, a fact some have
found confusing or hard to accept.’ 745 Neither Clement of Alexandria nor Origen seem
to have known this conclusion, and Eusebius and Jerome maintain that the traditional
longer ending did not exist in the majority of Greek manuscripts that they knew of. 746
However, the aforementioned passage appears at the end of the Gospel in the majority
of Western translations as well as in all of the Orthodox ones, and the Church tradition
confirms its canonicity. 747 As Brevard Childs affirms, ‘Mark’s Gospel received its
canonical shape by the addition of an ending which clearly does not stem from the
original author. Yet the addition is not simply a pious gloss attached to one late textual
tradition, but rather an early expansion which helped to form the dominant canonical
tradition.’ 748

742
For a comprehensive list of MSS that contain different forms of the Markan gospel’s ending, and also
an argumentation against the authenticity of the text from 16:9-20, see: METZGER 1994: 102-106.
SHEPHERD (2009: 77-97) does an exhaustive analysis of chapter 16 in Codex W, one of the oldest to
contain the longer ending (4th-5th century), and confirms the interpolation hypothesis.
743
METZGER 1987: 270.
744
DANOVE 2003: 123-124: ‘These twelve verses (i.e. Mk 16:9-20) include sixteen examples of words not
found in 1:1-16:8, five examples of words which appear earlier but are used in a unique sense, and four
unique phrases. Though some divergence in vocabulary and usage may be explained by the difference in
the subject matter under consideration, on the whole this study indicates significant problems concerning
the continuity between 1:1-16:8 and 16:9-20.’ Some theologians consider the 16:8 as the intended Mark’s
ending. Cf. FENTON, 1994: 1-7.
745
TARAZI 1999: 237.
746
‘The earliest form of the Eusebian canons (deriving from Ammonius, early third century) made no
provision for readings in Mark beyond 16:8.’ FRANCE 2002: 685.
747
BROWN; COLLINS, NJBC 66:91: 1052.
748
CHILDS 1984: 94.
114
For more than 150 years, the majority of biblical commentators have accepted the
hypothesis according to which, of the three synoptic gospels, that of Mark is the
oldest 749 and it represents the principally used source by Mark and Luke 750 (alongside a
mutual, secondary one, conventionally named Q). 751 Generally, it is thought to have
been written right before the Jewish War (66-73) or right after it. 752

If the conclusion of the gospel contains elements of an early resurrection tradition or

not, it is a question whose answer has yet to reach a consensus. Some authors tend to
reject fully the passage as not being of a notable importance. 753 Others, however, are
more reserved in evaluating the entire postscript as being a simple addition or synopsis.
The latter support the hypothesis according to which Mk 16:9-20 is based on an early,
independent resurrection tradition. 754

Most probably, the author of the postscript relied on a pre-Lukan thread of the
Ascension tradition, because numerous common elements with the descriptions from
the Gospel of Luke (24:50-53), the Acts of the Apostles (1:2, 9-11) and the Gospel of
John (20:17) can be identified. 755 The resurrection tradition, along the lines of which
even Mark could have relied on, was attested early, confirmed since the time of
Irenaeus. 756 Nevertheless, it is a generally acknowledged idea that Mk 16:19-20
represents a compilation based on the narrations from Luke-Acts and the Gospel of
John, even though there is the possibility that the text was transmitted to the author
orally and not through direct literary dependence. 757 ‘Thus the spurious Longer Ending
of Mark provides us with both an additional witness – one cannot say an independent

749
The official position of the Roman-Catholic Church, based on the tradition argument, recognises the
Gospel according to Matthew to be the first written gospel and used subsequently as source by Mark and
Luke in their writings. Cf. FILSON 1971: 73-75. The orthodox biblical scholar Veselin KESICH (1992: 71)
agrees with the generally accepted view and affirms that Mark’s Gospel was probably written before the
year 70.
750
Cf. SCHRAMM 1971: 4-9.
751
‘The priority of Mark and the existence of Q have been, and still are, widely accepted, and are
conveniently denoted by the title the two-document hypothesis.’ STYLER 1981: 285. Cf. SMITH 2003: 123-
137.
752
MORITZ 2005: 39.
753
Among others, see: LOHFINK 1971: 117-124.
754
Cf. DODD 1957: 9-35; FITZMYER 1985: 1586.
755
‘In its present form this verse [i.e. v. 19] postdates Luke-Acts. However, the Markan appendix may
contain source material which comes from a pre-Lukan stratum.’ ZWIEP 1997: 189.
756
‘Here there can be no doubt concerning the dating of the tradition: it is attested in the main by sources
as early as Irenaeus.’ EHRMAN 1993: 232.
757
CHILDS 1984: 95. Cf. ZWIEP 1997: 189; PARSONS 1987: 146.
115
witness – to belief in the Ascension in the first century and with a means of
understanding Luke’s own witness in the concluding chapter of his Gospel; i.e. the
event he is recording is indeed an Ascension.’ 758

In this pericope the resurrection of our Lord on the Mount of Olives is certainly
differently described compared to the descriptions of the raptures to heaven in the OT
and the inter-testamental writings. The event represents the Ascension of Christ with his
body from earth, through divine intervention and in the presence of witnesses.

Verse 19 seems like a combination between the ascension of Elijah and Psalm 110:1
(LXX 109:1). The terminology used by the author recalls the ascension of the prophet
Elijah (2Kgs 2:11-12; 1Macc 2:58). Also, unlike the descriptions in Luke-Acts, there is
a direct reference made to sitting to the right hand of the Father, interpreted as the
fulfilling of the prophecy in Psalm 110:1. Thus, the early interpretation of the Christ’s
Ascension presents it as being triumphant and it precedes the sitting to the right hand of
the Father, awaiting the second coming. 759 The description of the Ascension is brief:
after Christ shows himself to his disciples while they were at the table (16:14) and asks
them to preach his Gospel to all the creatures (16:15), he is received into heaven at the
right hand of the Father (16:19).

The time during which the event described in Mk 16:19-20 is happening is not clear in
the text; the resurrection, the post-resurrection appearances, the Ascension, and sitting at
the right hand of the Father all appear to be happening on the same day. 760 The place of
the Ascension is not even mentioned; however, from the Lukan descriptions, it is
identified with the Mount of Olives, in the North-east of Bethany (Lk 24:50). The
chronological arrangement of events in Mark 16 appears to be changed compared to the
traditional succession: ‘resurrection – sessio ad dexteram – appearances (from heaven)
has been altered into: resurrection – appearances – ascension (rapture) – sessio ad
dexteram.’ 761 Thus, it is only after a series of apparitions in front of his disciples after
the resurrection, that Christ leaves earth and sits on the divine throne. The period of
time between the resurrection and Ascension is an indefinite period of time during

758
DAVIES 1958: 43.
759
COLE 1961: 263.
760
LOHFINK 1971: 120; GOULD 1975: 307-308.
761
ZWIEP 1997: 132.
116
which the Lord is resurrected but has not yet ascended. 762 There is no indication in the
text to ascertain the fact that Christ was already in heaven before the description of the
Ascension in verse 19. 763 It must be mentioned that, compared to the ascension
traditions in the OT, the function of the event is different. It is not about prolonging
somebody’s life or delaying their death so that they could fulfil an eschatological task in
the future, but it represents an act of enthronement at the right hand of God. 764

In the conclusion of the resurrected Lord’s appearances, the great mystery of the
Ascension takes place, as a culmination of his work on earth and a premise for the
sending of the Holy Spirit on the day of Pentecost. Sitting at the right-hand of the Father
(sessio ad dexteram Dei) is interpreted by the early Church as a natural consequence of
the Ascension and is closely linked to it. 765 Also, it refers to a position of power and not
at all to a position in a certain time-frame. Augustine affirms that we must not interpret
the sitting at the right-hand literally, but spiritually 766 and, that during his stay after
being ascended into heaven with the body, he remains omnipresent. 767 Verse 19
represents both a completion of the Lord’s mission as well as a culmination point of the
entire. 768

Verse 20 concludes the gospel on a note of peace and spiritual happiness, like verse 53
from the Gospel of Luke (chapter 24). 769 This shows both the obedience which the
apostles demonstrate in fulfilling the last command of the Lord, as well as the fulfilment
of His promise to help them in their missionary activity. The difference between Luke
24:53 and Mark 16:20 is that, unlike the first which concludes through the description
of the disciples in the temple, the Gospel of Mark shows the Church developing in all
the margins of the world. 770 The entire narration of the Acts of the Apostles is

762
GNILKA 1989: 354.
763
‘The underlying thought seems to be that the appearances are temporary manifestations of the risen
Jesus to his followers, after which he withdrew himself again to some hidden place on earth.’ ZWIEP
1997: 133.
764
Cf. the ascension of Enoch as the Son of Man in 1 Enoch 70-71.
765
GNILKA 1989: 357.
766
AUGUSTINE, Letter 120 to Consentius, ACCS – NT 2: 255.
767
AUGUSTINE, Letter 187 to Dardanus 10, ACCS – NT 2: 255.
768
UPTON 2006: 168.
769
BROWN 1997: 149.
770
WATSON (1997: 77) stresses that ‘only now [after the Ascension] can the gospel of Jesus Christ be
preached to all nations; earlier, the confession that Jesus is the Christ had to be kept strictly secret (8:29-
30). This drive from secrecy into openness takes place in accordance with the principle that “there is
117
concentrated in this last verse. 771 ‘The audience is once more and finally identified with
the disciples, with whom it experienced a sense of calling right from the very beginning
of the gospel (1:16-20; 2:13-14; 3:13-19).’ 772 In some manuscripts, the gospel ends with
a final Amen (16:20b). 773

Ioannis Karavidopoulos concludes by writing that ‘verses 19-20 contain, on the one
hand, the ascension of Christ (which, after Luke 24:50-53 and Acts 1:9-11, takes place
on the Mount of Olives) and, on the other hand, a general declaration of the apostles’
activities – “everywhere”. The Lord, concluding the cycle of earthly activities, returns
“there where He was in the beginning”, sits “at the right hand of God” and from there
leads history and “work together” on the mission of the disciples, materializing their
mission through wonderful deeds (“signs”).’ 774

Many early Christian commentators of the Gospel of Luke connected the Ascension
event to the description from Mark 16:19 and thus, to the sitting at the right hand of
God; implicitly, of the fulfilling of the prophecy in Psalm 110:1. 775 Tertullian affirmed
that the Son ascends to the Father to sit next to him until the coming back to earth on the
clouds of the sky, in the same way he ascended. 776

Mark’s gospel ends with an account of the departure of Christ, and as Dillon also
stresses the account very probably is dependent on Luke: 777 ‘Consequently, while many
have been won over to the view that, as an event distinct from the resurrection and
terminus of the christophanies, the ascension originated in the thought of St. Luke, we
should rather keep an open mind towards the possibility, urged by others, that Luke was
not the first to recount this terminal episode, hence that either his gospel ending, or the
Acts account, or both, rest upon tradition he received.’ 778 This, of course, does not
suggest that the author of the ‘longer ending’ merely confined himself to the tradition

nothing hidden except to be manifest” (4:22). The Gospel according to Mark is itself an integral part of
this ongoing process of disclosure.’
771
‘Dieser Ausblick kann bereits auf ein längeres missionarisches Wirken zurücklenken und dankbar die
gewährte Hilfe des Herrn anerkennen.’ COLE 1961: 263.
772
UPTON 2006: 169.
773
This word with which the Gospel ends probably served initially as an indicator of the genre, being a
text used in the liturgical worship, but also as an element which confirms its canonical authority.
774
KARAVIDOPOULOS 2001: 347-348.
775
ZWIEP 1997: 165.
776
TERTULLIAN, Against Praxeas 30, ACCS – NT 2: 254-255.
777
LOHFINK 1971: 146.
778
DILLON 1978: 174-175; cf. LOHFINK 1971: 125.
118
used by Luke. Parsons even suggests that ‘some of this traditional material, including
the ascension tradition, may have been from a rather primitive source.’ 779

2.2 The Ascension of Christ in the Gospel of John (20:17)

λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς· Μαριάμ. στραφεῖσα 16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned
ἐκείνη λέγει αὐτῷ Ἑβραϊστί· ραββουνι (ὃ and said to him in Hebrew, “Rabboni!”
λέγεται διδάσκαλε). (which means Teacher).
λέγει αὐτῇ Ἰησοῦς· μή μου ἅπτου, οὔπω 17 Jesus said to her, “Do not hold me, for
γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν πατέρα· I have not yet ascended to the Father; but
πορεύου δὲ πρὸς τοὺς ἀδελφούς μου καὶ go to my brethren and say to them, I am
εἰπὲ αὐτοῖς· ἀναβαίνω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα ascending to my Father and your Father,
μου καὶ πατέρα ὑμῶν καὶ θεόν μου καὶ to my God and your God.”
θεὸν ὑμῶν.
ἔρχεται Μαριὰμ ἡ Μαγδαληνὴ 18 Mary Magdalene went and said to the
ἀγγέλλουσα τοῖς μαθηταῖς ὅτι ἑώρακα disciples, “I have seen the Lord”; and she
τὸν κύριον, καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ. told them that he had said these things to
her.

In the NT, the description of the actual event of the Ascension is found only in the
writings of the evangelist Luke (Lk 24:50-53; Acts 1:9-11). Concerning the Ascension,
Joseph Fitzmyer distinguishes two types of texts: those which allude to the event (Heb
4:14; 9:24; 1Pet 3:22; Rom 10:6-8; Eph 4:7-11 and Jn 20:17) and texts which describe
the Ascension (Lk 25:50-51; Acts 1:9-11; Mk 16:19). 780 In the fourth gospel, that of the
evangelist John, the Ascension is mentioned in three passages (3:13; 6:62; 20:17) 781, but
without their being a description of temporal and corporal aspects, but rather a
theological reality. 782 Even though the bodily Ascension of Jesus into heaven is not
explicitly mentioned, through resurrection the author sees the manifestation of Jesus’
glory and the beginning of the Ascension. 783 Analysing the structure of the first section
of chapter 20 (vv. 1-2, 11-18), we notice that this is based on the tradition of the empty

779
PARSONS 1987: 146.
780
FITZMYER 1984: 413-421.
781
Cf. DAVIES, He Ascended into Heaven, p. 44.
782
PARSONS, The Departure of Jesus in Luke-Acts, p. 13.
783
TASKER 1960: 221-222.
119
tomb, common to all three synoptics (the women come to the tomb, see an angel, leave
to tell the disciples and, whilst leaving, Christ appears to them). 784
In the passage John 20:11-18 is described the episode in which Christ the resurrected
shows himself to Mary of Magdala, one of the women who stood at the bottom of the
Cross in 19:25. The scene begins with the description of Mary who is crying by the
tomb (20:11) and who then receives the good news of the resurrection from two angels
(20:12-13). The text portrays a Mary who does not believe or does not yet understand
the mystery of the resurrection, but who will be the first to receive the news from Christ
himself. On her way back, she sees Jesus, but at first mistakes him for the gardener
(20:14-15). Christ, however, calls her name and she recognises him by calling him
‘Ραββουνί’ (20:16).

In verse 17, Christ tells Mary Magdalene not to touch him and informs her of his
Ascension to the Father, all the while sending her to notify his disciples. Here, a link
can be observed between Mary’s attempt to touch the resurrected one and the scene in
Matthew 28:9, where the myrrh-bearing women take hold of his feet and worship
him. 785 However, the difference between the two accounts (Matt 28:9 and Jn 20:17) is
that in the first the women clasped Jesus’ feet whereas in the second Mary is forbidden
to touch him (here, the content of the message is different). As Frans Neirynck observes
‘this interdiction and the use of a different verb (ἅπτομαι instead of κρατέω) are cited as
firm indications against Johannine dependence on Matthew.’ 786 In John 20:17, Mary’s
intention is that of expressing her adoration and joy at seeing the fulfilment of the
resurrection. 787 Joseph Blank observes that the touch (physical contact) represents the
principal way through which the man in this world becomes aware of the exterior
reality. However, the contact with the resurrected Jesus takes place in another way,

784
Cf. LINDARS 1960: 142-147; LILLIE 1965: 117-134. Based on the biblical references BRECK (1986:
227-230) analyses the iconographical tradition of the empty tomb which portrays the myrrh-bearing
women and the angel who announces them the Resurrection.
785
BEASLEY-MURRAY 1987: 376: ‘There is a clear contact between Mary’s attempt to take hold of Jesus
and the scene in Matt 28:9, where the women to whom Jesus appears “seized” (ἐκράτησαν) the feet of
Jesus and prostrated themselves before him. In this context the term κρατέω is virtually synonymous with
ἅπτομαι.’
786
NEIRYNCK 1991: 583.
787
‘Remembering Eastern customs, we are probably to assume that Mary did just what Matthew
describes: She prostrated herself before Jesus and sought to clasp his feet. It was an act of joyful adoration
combined with a simple desire to hold Jesus, not because she feared to lose him again, but in a perfectly
normal expression of affection.’ BEASLEY-MURRAY 1987: 376.
120
through faith, word or in Spirit. 788 The demand not to touch Christ (μή μου ἅπτου)
seems to suggest the fact that Mary seized (took hold of) his feet or was about to. What
John relates does not bear that meaning that ‘Jesus did not allow Mary to touch him (for
whatever reason) or that he regarded an act of proskynesis inappropriate for someone
who failed to grasp the meaning of the new relationship that he had entered into through
the resurrection... The issue is that Mary should not “cling” to Jesus, not “hold on” to
him.’ 789 B. Violet argued upon the use of an Aramaic word (from the stem dabaq) in
this passage, which means both ‘attach oneself to a person’ and ‘follow’; but this idea is
not confirmed by the Latin translation (noli me tangere). 790 Thus, the words ‘do not
hold me’ are connected with ‘go to my brethren and say to them’. 791 Origen interprets
the Lord’s refusal to be touched by Mary saying: ‘But after he had destroyed his
enemies through his passion, the Lord, who is mighty in battle and strong [Ps 24:8],
required a purification that could be given to him by his Father alone. And this is why
he forbids Mary to touch him.’ 792

The fact that Mary was entrusted with delivering the message that Christ has risen and
that he showed himself to her, ranks her among the witnesses of the resurrection 793 and,
as a result, amongst those who receive a special mission to preach. 794 She becomes
God’s messenger to prepare his coming among the apostles and her task, a precondition
for the sending of the Holy Spirit. 795

The repetition of the words ‘mine’ and ‘your’ suggests that a new type of filial
relationship develops at the same time as the Ascension. 796 The disciples, called ‘my

788
BLANK 1981: 170-171.
789
ZWIEP 1997: 137. Cf. NICHOLSON 1983: 72-73.
790
Cited by HAENCHEN 1984: 209-210.
791
There is no mysterious reason for which Mary Magdalene must not touch the Lord. She received a
message from the Lord and must transmit it to the Apostles as fast as possible. Cf. MCGEHEE 1986: 299-
302.
792
ORIGEN, Commentary on John 6:287, ACCS – NT 4b: 348.
793
Mary Magdalene is the first to proclaim the resurrection to the Apostles: Έώρακα τὸν κύρον (v. 18b).
POTTERIE 1984: 36: ‘Elle a finalement compris que le temps passé des rapports directs avec le Jésus
terrestre est révolu: Jésus est ressuscité, il est le Seigneur, il monte définitivement vers le Père, il est chez
le Père. Cette découverte ne lui est plus réservée: elle va porter ce message pascal aux disciples.’
794
The angels who appear to Mary symbolise the Apostles who, in the same way, will be the first to
announce to the Church that Christ has risen. TARAZI 2004: 254-255.
795
LEE 1995: 37-49.
796
‘Die Sehnsucht und das glühende Verlangen seines Herzens ist nicht nur, uns zu retten, sondern uns
dadurch zu retten, daß e runs vor seinen Vater stellt, daß er den Vater offenbart und dadurch verherrlicht,
121
brethren’, now become sons of God the Father. 797 In other words, Christ as the second
person of the Holy Trinity is the Son of the Father from eternity; Christians only become
the sons of God through adoption and forgiveness. 798 Cyril of Jerusalem explains this
through: ‘For he did not say, “I ascend to our Father”, lest the creatures should be made
fellows of the Only Begotten. Instead, he said, “My Father and your Father”. He is in
one way mine, by nature. He is in another way, yours, by adoption.’ 799 Brown, on the
other hand, rejects ‘the contention that in this passage Jesus is making a careful (and
theological distinction between his own relationship to the Father and the relationship of
his disciples to the Father, i.e., between his natural sonship and their broader
sonship/childhood gained. This passage must be interpreted against the background of
Johannine theology: The ascension of which Jesus is speaking in 20:17 will lead to that
giving of the Spirit (20:22; also 7:38-39) which will beget the disciples anew from above
(3:3) and make them God’s children (1:12). Thus Jesus’ Father will now become the
disciples’ Father and they will become Jesus’ brothers (and sisters).’ 800

In what the day of the Ascension is concerned, in the Gospel according to John it
appears as if it were on the same day as the resurrection. Jerome affirms that the
Ascension took place on the same day as the resurrection (In die dominica Paschae), but
he mentions in other passages, the number of forty days (Epistola 59:5; 120:7).
Interpreting the episode in the Gospel of John, he affirmed that ‘this is the meaning:
“Whom you seek dead, you do not deserve to touch alive. If you think that I have not yet
ascended to the Father, but have been taken away by the deceit of men, you are
unworthy of my touch”.’ 801 Through this, we realise that Jerome takes “the Ascension to
the Father” as referring to the resurrection. Brown clearly distinguishes between the

das Ziel des Heilswerkes Jesu ist es nach der Andeutung von Jo 20,17, daß wir als seine Brüder Söhne
dieses Vaters warden, Ihm, dem Vater, in Liebe zugewandt.’ THÜSING 1995: 130.
797
‘Because of this new relationship, made possible by Jesus’ passing from this world to the Father
through the hour (see 13:1), they are no longer Jesus’ disciples, but his brethren.’ MOLONEY 1998: 526;
cf. THEOPHYLACT OF OHRID, Commentary on John 20:17.
798
MORRIS 1988.2: 703.
799
CYRIL OF JERUSALEM, Catechetical Lectures 11.18.19, ACCS – NT 4b: 354.
800
BROWN 1994: 175 n. 245; HAENCHEN 1984: 210: ‘He [John] really intends to say that the God of Jesus
is now also the God of the disciples, that the Father of Jesus is the same as the Father of the disciples. The
distinction in relationship to God between Jesus and the disciples has been abolished and not continued,
as will be repeated in verses 21f. in another form.’
801
Epistolae 120:5, cited by DAVIES 1958: 109.
122
Ascension of Jesus understood in terms of a post-resurrection glorification, and the
Ascension after forty days, described in the Acts of the Apostles (1:3). 802

Lohfink believed that in John’s Gospel the Ascension is united with the resurrection and
that through the wording used by the author (20:17), one cannot say that the Ascension
took place between the Lord’s encounter with Mary Magdalene and his coming amongst
the apostles (20:19). 803 On the other hand, Peter Atkins, by analysing the later
apparitions (21:1-14; 26), claims that the Ascension would have happened during the
time span between the resurrection and his coming amongst the apostles. 804 However,
Arie W. Zwiep explains thus: ‘If we take the larger Johannine context into consideration
(the connection ascension-giving of the Spirit) and follow the Johannine understanding
of Jesus’ ἀνάβασις as a description of Jesus’ entire passage to the Father through
passion, death, resurrection and ascension, Jn 20:17 seems to make good sense.’ 805 Thus,
the Ascension has not yet been completed because the Holy Spirit has not yet been sent.
The usage of the present tense (ἀνάβαίνω πρὸς τὸν πατέρα) suggests imminence; it will
not be long before the finalisation of the Ascension. 806 Moreover, in the analysed text
we encounter the expression of the evangelist’s theology and not a tradition of the
Ascension, as is the case in Mark 16:19-20. 807 Also, there is no explicit mention or
allusion to Psalm 110. As a result, the hypothesis according to which in John 20:17, the
evangelist actually uses the terms of the ascension to express the resurrection, which is
understood as being in an indissoluble link with the Ascension, must be taken into
account. This is not about a pattern as that in Luke-Acts, where the apparitions take
place throughout forty days, and then the Ascension occurs. 808 The entire series of

802
BROWN 1970: 1012.
803
‘Der bereits Auferstandene zagt zwar: οὔπω γὰρ ἀναβέβηκα πρὸς τὸν πατέρα. Mit dieser Formulierung
soll jedoch kaum die Himmelfahrt auf die Zeit zwischen der Begegnung mit Maria und die abendlichen
Erscheinung fixiert werden.’ LOHFINK 1971: 118.
804
‘In John’s Gospel it is not clear whether these appearances to the disciples are intended to be seen as
those of the ascended Christ or whether for his purposes the author does not see the need to draw that
distinction. Certainly John does not include any record of an Ascension event, but he does seem to be
very aware of the status of Christ as the one who has ascended to the Father.’ ATKINS 2001: 48.
805
ZWIEP 1997: 137.
806
TASKER 1960: 225.
807
LOHFINK 1971: 118: ‘Gerade von hier aus ist es nicht möglich, sondern sogar warscheinlich, daß Jo
20,17 allein aus der Theologie des Evangelisten und nicht aus einer Himmelfahrtserzählung herzuleiten
ist’
808
‘The Johannine pattern of revelation of the risen one to his own from heaven may well reflect
tradition. The peculiarity of John’s account becomes then the pre-ascension encounter with Mary.’
LOADER 1992: 123.
123
events, starting with the crucifixion and ending with the Ascension, represents a return
to the Father. 809 The Ascension also represents an act of manifestation of Christ’s grace
through his return to the Father. 810 The same is also confirmed by the language used by
Mary in verse 18, elements which do not pertain to the final discourses or the tradition
of the Ascension.

In Mary Magdalene’s attitude, there can be seen a shift from unbelief and sadness
(darkness) to belief and joy (light). This episode (20:11-18) begins by describing a
Mary in tears next to the grave and ends by sharing the joy of the resurrection with the
apostles. The proof of Mary’s having seen the Lord resurrected was enough to believe in
the sacrament of the resurrection both for her as well as the ten apostles, and through
this, to reach the plenitude of faith. 811 Several critics have found a link between verse 20
and Psalm 22:22-23. 812 Theodore of Mopsuestia affirmed that ‘through what he said he
wanted both to teach his disciples about his resurrection and his ascension. And this is
evident from the fact that he showed himself again to the disciples who were in doubt,
and he ordered them to touch the wounds on his body in the spots of the nails.’ 813 Mary
does not mention anything about the angels, but shares with the apostles only the
message from Jesus, which is no longer reproduced word for word by the author in verse
20.

809
ZWIEP 1997: 138: ‘The entire course of events constitutes the “hour” of the Son of Man; the entire
sequence of events starting from the crucifixion is Jesus’ ἀνάβασις to the Father.’ Cf. BROWN 1970:
1013-1014.
810
‘As He came down from heaven – mythological language again – he will ascend again thither where
he previously was (Jn 6:62; cf. Jn 3:13). He will be “elevated” (3:14; 12:32, 34; cf. 8:28); he will be
“glorified” (12:23; 13:31f.; 17:1; cf. 7:39; 12:6), glorified with the “glory” that he had in pre-existence
with the Father (17:5, 24). His coming and his going belong together as a unit, the unity of his activity as
Revealer; this is indicated by the fact that both his coming and his going (3:19 and 12:31) can be termed
the judgement and by the fact that both his exaltation and his sending can be regarded as the basis for the
gift of eternal life (3:14 and 3:16).’ BULTMANN 1958: 35.
811
According to the tradition in Mk 16:10-11, the apostles refused to believe the testimony of Mary
Magdalene. BEASLEY-MURRAY 1987: 378.
812
‘The possibility becomes more interesting when we reflect that “Lord” (kyrios) is truly the name of the
risen Jesus, and that in LXX kyrios renders the tetragrammaton, YHWH, which is the proper name of
God.’ BROWN 1970: 1017.
813
THEODORE OF MOPSUESTIA, Commentary on John 7.20.17, ACCS – NT 4b: 352.
124
 BIBLIOGRAPHY

ALAND, Barbara
1989 ‘Die Rezeption des neutestamentlichen Textes in den ersten Jahrhunderten’, in
Jean-Marie SEVRIN (ed.), The New Testament in Early Christianity, BETL 86 (Leuven:
Leuven University Press), pp. 1-38.

ABERBACH, Moses; GROSSFELD, Bernard

1982 Targum Onkelos to Genesis. A Critical Analysis together with an English
Translation of the Text (New York: Ktav Publishing House).

ALEXEEV, Anatoly A.; KARAKOLIS, Christos; LUZ, Ulrich (eds.)

2008 Einheit der Kirche im Neuen Testament. Dritte europäische orthodox-wesliche
Exegetenkonferenz in Sankt Petersburg 24.-31. August 2005, WUNT 218 (Tübingen:
J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

ALSUP, John E.
1975 The Post-Resurrection Appearance Stories of the Gospel Tradition, Calwer
Theologische Monographien A5 (London: SPCK).

ANDERSON, Gary A.; STONE, Michael E. (eds.)

1994 A Synopsis of the Books of Adam and Eve, Society of Biblical Literature – Early
Judaism and Its Literature 5 (Atlanta: Scholars Press).

ASSEFA, Daniel
2007 L’Apocalypse des animaux (1Hen. 85-90) une propagande militaire? Approches
narrative, historico-critique, perspectives théologiques, JSJSup 120 (Leiden: Brill).

ATKINS, Peter
2001 Ascension Now. Implications of Christ’s Ascension for Today’s Church
(Collegeville: The Liturgical Press).

AUNE, David E.
1988 The New Testament in Its Literary Environment (Cambridge: James Clarke &
Co.).

BAILLET, Maurice
1982 Qumrân Grotte 4 III (4Q482-4Q520), Discoveries in the Judean Desert 7 (Oxford:
Clarendon).

BAKER, Christopher
2007 The Hybrid Church in the City. Third Space Thinking (Hants: Ashgate
Publishing).

125
BARKER, Margaret
2005 The Lost Prophet. The Book of Enoch and its Influence on Christianity (Sheffield:
Sheffield Phoenix Press).

BARNARD, L.W.
1968 ‘The Day of the Resurrection and Ascension of Christ in the Epistle of Barnabas’,
in Revue bénédictine 78, pp. 106-107.
1997 (transl.) JUSTIN MARTYR, The First and Second Apologies, Ancient Christian
Writers 56 (New York: Paulist Press).

BARRETT, C.K.
1994 A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on The Acts of the Apostles, vol. 1 (Acts 1-
14), ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

BARTON, John; MUDDIMAN, John

2001 The Oxford Bible Commentary (New York: OUP).

BAUER, Walter; ALAND, Kurt; ALAND, Barbara

1988 Griechisch-Deutsches Wörterbuch zu den Schriften des Neuen Testaments und der
frühchristlichen Literatur (BAA), 6th edition (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter).

BEASLEY-MURRAY, George R.
1987 John, WBC 36 (Waco: Word Books).

BEHR, John
2001 Formation of Christian Theology 1: The Way to Nicaea (Crestwood: SVS Press).

BELLINZONI, Arthur J.
1998 ‘The Gospel of Luke in the Second Century CE’, in Richard P. THOMPSON;
Thomans E. PHILLIPS (eds.), Literary Studies in Luke-Acts. Essays in Honor of Joseph
B. Tyson (Macon: Mercer University Press), pp. 59-76.

BENOIT, Pierre
1949 ‘L’Ascension’, in Revue Biblique 56, pp. 161-203; repr. in Pierre BENOIT, Exégèse
et Théologie 1 (Paris: Cerf, 1961), pp. 363-411 and transl. into English in Pierre
BENOIT, Jesus and the Gospel 1 (London: Darton, Longman & Todd, 1973). The second
edition published in X. LÉON-DUFOUR (ed.), Vocabulaire de Théologie Biblique (VThB)
(Paris: Cerf, 1971), pp. 87-91.

BERGEN, Wesley J.
1999 Elisha and the End of Prophetism, Journal for the Study of the Old Testament –
Supplement Series 286 (Sheffield: SAP).

BERGER, Klaus
1976 Die Auferstehung des Propheten und die Erhöhung des Menschensohnes.
Traditionsgeschichtliche Untersuchungen zur Deutung des Geschickes Jesu in

126
frühchristlichen Texten, Studien zur Umvelt des Neuen Testaments 13 (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
1981 ‘Das Buch der Jubiläen’, in Hermann LICHTENBERGER, Unterweisung in
erzählender Form, JSHRZ 2.3 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus).

BERNHEIMER, Richard
1935 ‘Vitae Prophetarum’, in Journal of the American Oriental Society 55.2, pp. 200-
203.

BETTIOLO, Paolo; KOSSOVA, Alda; LEONARDI, Claudio; NORELLI, Enrico; PERRONE,

Lorenzo
1995 Ascensio Isaiae. Textus, Corpus Christianorum – Series Apocryphorum 7
(Brepolis: Turnhout).

BEYERLE, Stefan
2005 Die Gottesvorstellungen in der antik-jüdischen Apokaliptik, JSJSup 103 (Leiden:
Brill).

BINZ, Stephen J.
1989 The Passion and Resurrection Narratives of Jesus: A Commentary, (Collegeville:
The Liturgical Press).

BIRD, Michael F.
2007 ‘The Unity of Luke-Acts in Recent Discussion’, in JSNT 29.4, pp. 425-448.

BLACK, Matthew
1985 The Book of Enoch or I Enoch. A New English Translation, Studia in Veteris
Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 7 (Leiden: Brill).

BLANK, Joseph
1981 The Gospel According to St. John, vol. 3, The New Testament for Spiritual
Reading 9 (New York: Crossroad).

BOCK, Darrell L.
1996 Luke, vol. 2 (9:51-24:53), Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament
(BECNT) 3B (Grand Rapids: Baker Books).

BOCKMUEHL, Markus
2005 ‘Why not Let Acts Be Acts? In Conversation with C. Kavin Rowe’, in JSNT 28.2,
pp. 163-166.

BOGAERT, Pierre
1969 Apocalypse syriaque de Baruch 1, Sources Chrétiennes 144 (Paris: Éditions du
Cerf).

BOOIJ, Th.
1991 ‘Rule in the Midst of Your Foes!’, in VetT 41.4, pp. 396-407.

127
BOVON, François
2005 ‘The Reception and Use of the Gospel of Luke in the Second Century’, in Craig
G. BARTHOLOMEW; Joel B. GREEN; Anthony C. THINSELTON (eds.), Reading Luke.
Interpretation, Reflection, Formation, Scripture and Hermeneutics 6 (Milton Keynes:
Paternoster Press/Grand Rapids: Zondervan), pp. 379-400.
2006 Luke the Theologian: Fifty-five Years of Research (1950-2005), 2nd revised ed.
(Waco: Baylor University Press).
2009 Das Evangelium nach Lukas (Lk 19,28-24,53), EKK 3.4 (Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag/Düsseldorf: Patmos Verlag).

BRECK, John
1986 The Power of the Word in the Worshiping Church (Crestwood: SVS Press).
2003 God with Us. Critical Issues in Christian Life and Faith (Crestwood: SVS Press).

BRENTON, Lancelot C.L. (ed.)

1986 The Septuagint with Apocrypha: Greek and English (Peabody: Hendrickson).

BRODIE, Thomas L.
1990 ‘Luke-Acts as an Imitation and Emulation of the Elijah-Elisha Narrative’, in Earl
RICHARD (ed.), New Views on Luke and Acts (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press), pp.
72-84.
2000 The Crucial Bridge. The Elijah-Elisha Narrative as an Interpretive Synthesis of
Genesis-Kings and a Literary Model for the Gospels (Collegeville: The Liturgical
Press).

BRONNER, Leah
1968 The Stories of Elijah and Elisha as Polemics Against Baal Worship, Pretoria
Oriental Series 6 (Leiden: Brill).

BROWN, Raymond E.
1970 The Gospel According to John (XIII-XXI), AB 29A (New York: Doubleday).
1994 An Introduction to New Testament Christology (New York: Paulist Press).
1997 An Introduction to the New Testament, ABRL (New York: Doubleday).

BRUCE, F.F.
1952 The Acts of the Apostles. The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary
(London: Tyndale Press).

BUCKWALTER, H. Douglas
1996 The Character and Purpose of Luke’s Christology, SNTS MS 89 (Cambridge:
CUP).

BULTMANN, Rudolf
1941 Neues Testament und Mythologie. Das Problem der Entmythilogisierung der
neutestamentlichen Verkündigung, Beiträge zur evangelischen Theologie 96 (München:
Chr. Kaiser).
1958 Theology of the New Testament, vol. 2 (London: SCM Press).
128
BURTON, Ernest De Witt
1900 ‘The Purpose and Plan of the Gospel of Luke’, in The Biblical World 16.4, pp.
342-350.

BUTH, Randall
1998 ‘A More Complete Semitic Background for Bar-Enasha, “Son of Man”’, in Craig
A. EVANS; James A. SANDERS (eds.), The Function of Scripture in Early Jewish and
Christian Tradition, JSNTSup 154/Studies in Scripture in Early Judaism and
Christianity 6 (Sheffield: SAP), pp. 176-189.

CADBURY, Henry J.
1958 The Making of Luke-Acts (London: SPCK).

CALVIN, Jean
1949 (repr.) Commentary Upon the Acts of the Apostles, vol. 1, Christopher Fetherstone
(transl.) (Grand Rapids: Wm.B. Eerdmans).

CAMERON, Averil; HALL, Stuart G. (transl.)

1999 EUSEBIUS, Life of Constantine, Clarendon Ancient History Series (Oxford:
Clarendon Press).

CHARLES, R.H.
1900 The Ascension of Isaiah (London: Adam & Charles Black).
1902 The Book of Jubilees or The Little Genesis (London: Adam & Charles Black).
1912 The Book of Enoch or 1 Enoch (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
1913 The Apocrypha and Pseudepigrapha of the Old Testament, vol. 2 (London: OUP).

CHARLESWORTH, James H.
1982 The History of the Rechabites, vol. I: The Greek Recension, Text and Translations
17 (Pseudepigrapha Series 10) (Chico, California: Scholars Press/Society of Biblical
Literature).
1983/1985 Old Testament Pseudepigrapha, 2 vols., ABRL (New York: Doubleday).
1992 Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ABRL (New York: Doubleday).

CHAIGNON, Francis de
2008 Le Mystère de l’Ascension, Cahiers de L’École Cathédrale 82 (Paris: Parole et
Silence).

CHILDS, Brevard S.
1984 The New Testament as Canon: An Introduction (London: SCM Press).

COHEN, A. (ed.);
1965 The Minor Tractates of the Talmud. Massektoth Ḳeṭannoth, vol. 2 (London:
Soncino Press).

COLE, R.A.

129
1961 The Gospel according to St. Mark. An Introduction and Commentary, TynNTC 2
(Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press).

COLLINS, Adela Yarbro

1996 Cosmology and Eschatology in Jewish and Christian Apocalypticism, JSJSup 50
(Leiden: Brill).

CONZELMANN, Hans
1961 The Theology of St Luke, Geoffrey Buswell (transl.) (London: Faber and Faber).

COOGAN, Michael D. (ed.)

2007 The New Oxford Annotated Bible, augmented 3rd edition (NRSV) (Oxford: OUP).

CORLEY, Jeremy
2008 ‘Sirach 44:1-15 as Introduction to the Praise of the Ancestors’, in Géza G.
XERAVITS; József ZSENGELLÉR (eds.), Studies in the Book of Ben Sira, JSJSup 127
(Leiden: Brill), pp. 151-181.

CRONK, George
1982 The Message of the Bible: An Orthodox Christian Perspective (Crestwood: SVS
Press).

CULLMANN, Oscar
1963 The Christology of the New Testament (London: SCM Press).

CULY, Martin M.; PARSONS, Mikeal C.

2003 Acts. A Handbook on the Greek Text, Baylor Handbook on the Greek New
Testament (Waco: Baylor University Press).

CURETON, W.
1864 Ancient Syriac Documents (London: Williams and Norgate).

DANIELOU, Jean
1957 The Angels and Their Mission According to the Fathers of the Church, David
Heimann (transl.) (Notre Dame: Ave Maria Press).
1970 ‘Gregoire de Nysse et l’Origine de la Fete de l’Ascension’, in Patrick GRANFIELD;
Josef A. JUNGMANN (eds.), Kyriakon. Festschrift Johannes Quasten 2 (Münster:
Aschendorff), pp. 663-666.

DANOVE, Paul L.
2003 The End of Mark’s Story. A Methodological Study, BIS 3 (Leiden: E.J. Brill).

DAVENPORT, Gene L.
1971 The Eschatology of the Book of Jubilees, Studia Post-Biblica 20 (Leiden: Brill).

DAVIES, J.G.
1954 ‘The Peregrinatio Egeriae and the Ascension’, in Vigiliae Christianae 8.1/2, pp.
93-100.
130
1958 He Ascended into Heaven. A Study in the History of Doctrine, Bampton Lectures
1958 (London: Lutterworth Press).

DAVILA, James R.
2001 Descenders to the Chariot. The People behind the Hekhalot Literature, JSJSup 70
(Leiden: Brill).

DAWSON, Geritt Scott

2004 Jesus Ascended. The Meaning of Christ’s Continuing Incarnation (London: T&T
Clark).

DAVIDSON, Maxwell J.
1992 Angels at Qumran. A Comparative Study of 1 Enoch 1-36, 72-108 and Sectarian
Writings from Qumran, JSPSup 11 (Sheffield: SAP).

DE JONGE, Marinus
2000 ‘The Literary Development of the Life of Adam and Eve’, in Gary ANDERSON;
Michael STONE; Johannes TROMP (eds.), Literature on Adam and Eve: Collected
Essays, Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 50 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 239-250.

DEAN-OTTING, Mary
1984 Heavenly Journeys. A Study of the Motif in Hellenistic Jewish Literature,
Judentum und Umwelt 8, (Frakfurt: Peter Lang).

DEFERRARI, Roy J. (transl.)

1953 EUSEBIUS PAMPHILI, Ecclesiastical History, Books 1-5, The Fathers of the Church
19 (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press).

DESIMONE, Russel J.
1970 The Treatise of Novatian the Roman Presbyter on the Trinity. A Study of the Text
and Doctrine, Studia Ephemeridis ‘Augustinianum’ 4 (Roma: Institutum Patristicum
‘Augustinianum’).
1974 (transl.) NOVATIAN, The Trinity, The Spectacles, Jewish Foods, In Praise of
Purity, Letters, The Fathers of the Church 67 (Washington: The Catholic University of
America Press).

DEXINGER, Ferdinand
1977 Henochs Zehnwochenapokalypse und Offene Probleme der Apokalyptikforschung,
Studia Post-Biblica 29 (Leiden: Brill).

DILLON, Richard
1978 From Eye-Witnesses to Ministers of the World. Tradition and Composition in Luke
24, AnBib 82 (Rome: Biblical Institute Press).

DIMITROV, Ivan Z.; DUNN, James D.G.; LUZ, Ulrich; NIEBUHR, Karl-Wilhelm (eds.)

131
2004 Das Alte Testament als christliche Bibel in orthodoxer und westlicher Sicht.
Zweite europäische orthodox-westliche Exegetenkonferenz im Rilakloster vom 8.-15.
September 2001, WUNT 174 (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

DODD, C.H.
1957 ‘The Appearance of the Risen Christ: An Essay in Form Criticism’, in D.E.
NINEHAM (ed.), Studies in the Gospels. Essays in Memory of R.H. Lightfoot (Oxford:
Blackwell), pp. 9-35; republ. in DODD, More New Testament Studies (Manchester:
University Press, 1968), pp. 102-133.

DOERING, Lutz
2005 ‘Review of DIMITROV; DUNN; LUZ; NIEBUHR (2004)’, in JSNT 27.5, p. 157.
2009 ‘Purity and Impurity in the Book of Jubilees’, in Gabriele BOCCACCINI, Giovanni
IBBA (eds.), Enoch and the Mosaic Torah. The Evidence of Jubilees (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans), pp. 261-275.

DONNE, Brian K.
1983 Christ Ascended. A Study in the Significance of the Ascension of Jesus Christ in
the New Testament (Exeter: Paternoster Press).

DUNN, James D.G.

2001 ‘The Ascension of Jesus: A Test Case for Hermeneutics’, in Friedrich AVEMARIE;
Hermann LICHTENBERGER (eds.), Auferstehung – Resurrection. The Fourth Durham-
Tübingen Research Symposium Resurrection, Trasfiguration and Exaltation in Old
Testament, Ancient Judaism and Early Christianity (Tübingen, September, 1999),
WUNT 135 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck), pp. 301-321.

DUNN, James D.G.; KLEIN, Hans; LUZ, Ulrich; MIHOC, Vasile (eds.)
2000 Auslegung der Bibel in orthodoxer und westlicher Perspektive. Akten des wes-
östlichen Neutestamentler/innen-Symposiums von Neamt vom 4.-11. September 1998,
WUNT 130 (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

EHRMAN, Bart D.
1993 The Orthodox Corruption of the Scripture. The Effect of Early Christological
Controversies on the Text of the New Testament (New York: OUP).

EISENMAN, Robert H.; WISE, Michael

1992 The Dead Sea Scrolls Uncovered (Doreset: Element).

ELLIOTT, J.K.
1993 The Apocryphal New Testament. A Collection of Apocryphal Christian Literature
in an English Translation (Oxford: Clarendon Press).

ELOWSKY, Joel C. (ed.)

2007 John 11-21, ACCS – NT 4b (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press).

ENSLIN, Morton S.

132
1928 ‘The Ascension Story’, in JBL 47.1/2, pp. 60-73.

ESHEL, Ester
1996 ‘4Q471B: A Self-Glorification Hymn’, in Revue de Qumran 17.65-68, pp. 175-
203.
1999 ‘The Identification of the “Speaker” of the Self-Glorification Hymn’, in Donald
W. PARRY, Eugene ULRICH (eds.), The Provo International Conference on The Dead
Sea Scrolls. Technological Innovations, New Texts, and Reformulated Issues, Studies on
the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 619-635.

ESTRADA, Nelson P.
2004 From Followers to Leaders. The Apostles in the Ritual of Status Transformation in
Acts 1-2, JSNTSup 255 (London: T&T Clark).

EVANS, Christopher Francis

1990 Saint Luke, TPI New Testament Commentaries (London: SCM Press/Philadelphia:
Trinity Press).

EVANS, Ernest (transl.)

1948 Tertullians’s Treatise Against Praxeas (London: SPCK).
1960 Tertullians’s Treatise on the Resurrection (London: SPCK).
1964 Tertullians’s Homily on Baptism (London: SPCK).

EVANS, Craig A.
1992 Noncanonical Writings and New Testament Interpretation (Peabody: Hendrickson
Publishers).

FALK, Daniel K.
1995 ‘Jewish Prayer Literature and the Jerusalem Church in Acts’, in Richard
BAUCKHAM (ed.), The Book of Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, The Book of Acts in Its
First Century Setting 4 (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster
Press).

FALLS, Thomas B. (transl.)

2003 JUSTIN MARTYR, Dialogues with Trypho, Selections from the Fathers of the
Church 3 (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press).

FARMER, W.R.
1974 The Last Twelve Verses of Mark, SNTS MS 25 (Cambridge: CUP).

FARROW, Douglas
1999 Ascension and Ecclesia. On the Significance of the Doctrine of the Ascension for
Ecclesiology and Christian Cosmology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

FILSON, Floyd V.
1971 A New Testament History (London: SCM Press).

FITZMYER, Joseph A.
133
1984 ‘The Ascension of Christ and Pentecost’, in Theological Studies 45, pp. 413-421.
1985 The Gospel According to Luke (X-XXIV), vol. 2, AB 28A (Garden City:
Doubleday).
1998 To Advance the Gospel. New Testament Studies (Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans).

FECIORU, D. (transl.)
1993 IOAN DAMASCHIN (John of Damascus), Dogmatica, 3rd edition (București:
Scripta).

FENTON, John
1994 ‘The Ending of Mark’s Gospel’, in Stephen BARTON; Graham STATON (eds.),
Resurrection. Essays in Honour of Leslie Houlden (London: SPCK), pp. 1-7.

FLETCHER-LOUIS, Crispin H.T.

2002 All the Glory of Adam. Liturgical Anthropology in the Dead Sea Scrolls, Studies
on the Texts of the Desert of Judah 42 (Leiden: Brill).

FRANCE, R.T.
2002 The Gospel of Mark. A Commentary on the Greek Text, The New International
Greek Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans/Carlisle:
Paternoster Press).

FRANKLIN, Eric
1975 Christ the Lord. A Study in the Purpose and Theology of Luke-Acts (London:
SPCK).

FRETHEIM, Terence E.
1999 First and Second Kings, Westminster Bible Companion (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox Press).

FREY, Jörg
1997 ‘Different Patterns of Dualistic Thought’, in Moshe BERNSTEIN, Florentino García
MARTÍNEZ, John KAMPEN (eds.), Legal Texts and Legal Issues. Proceedings of the
Second Meeting of the International Organisation for Qumran Studies, Published in
Honour of Joseph M. Baumgarten, vol. 2, Studies on the Texts of the Desert of Judah
23 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 275-336.

FRITZ, Volkmar
2003 1 & 2 Kings. A Continental Commentary, transl. Anselm Hagedorn (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press).

FUJITA, Neil S.
1986 A Crack in the Jar. What Ancient Jewish Documents Tell Us About the New
Testament (New York: Paulist Press).

GERLEMAN, Gillis

134
1981 ‘Psalm CX’, in VetT 31.1, pp. 17-18.

GINGARAS, George E. (transl.)

1970 Egeria: Diary of a Pilgrimage, Ancient Christian Writers 38 (New York: Newman
Press).

GNILKA, Joachim
1989 Das Evangelium nach Markus (Mk 8,27-16,20), EKK 2.2, 3. Auflage (Zürich:
Benzinger/Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag).

GRANT, Robert M. (transl.)

1997 Irenaeus of Lyons, The Early Church Fathers (London: Routledge).

GREGORY, Andrew
2003 The Reception of Luke and Acts in the Period before Irenaeus. Looking for Luke in
the Second Century, WUNT (2. Reihe) 169 (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).
2005 ‘Looking for Luke in the Second Century. A Dialogue with François Bovon’, in
Craig G. BARTHOLOMEW; Joel B. GREEN; Anthony C. THINSELTON (eds.), Reading
Luke. Interpretation, Reflection, Formation, Scripture and Hermeneutics 6 (Milton
Keynes: Paternoster Press/Grand Rapids: Zondervan), pp. 401-415.
2007 ‘The Reception of Luke and Acts and the Unity of Luke-Acts’, in JSNT 29.4, pp.
459-472.

GREGORY, Andrew; TUCKETT, Christopher (eds.)

2005.1 The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, The New
Testament and the Apostolic Fathers Series (Oxford: OUP).
2005.2 Trajectories through the New Testament and the Apostolic Fathers, The New
Testament and the Apostolic Fathers Series (Oxford: OUP).

GROSSFELD, Bernard
1988 The Targum Onqelos to Genesis, The Aramaic Bible 6 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

GOODER, Paula R.
2006 Only the Third Heaven? 2 Corinthians 12.1-10 and Heavenly Ascent, JSNTSup
313 (London: T&T Clark).

GOUDOEVER, J. van
1961 Biblical Calendars, 2nd revised edition (Leiden: Brill).

GOULD, Ezra P.
1975 A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. Mark, ICC
(Edinburgh: T & T Clark).

GOULDER, M.D.
1964 Type and History in Acts (London: SPCK).

GURTNER, Daniel M.

135
2008 ‘The “Twenty-Fifth Year of Jeconiah” and the date of 2 Baruch’, in JSP 18.1, pp.
23-32.

HAENCHEN, Ernst
1956 Die Apostelgeschichte, KEK 3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).
1963 ‘Judentum und Christentum in der Apostelgeschichte’, in ZNW 54.3-4, pp. 155–
187.
1966 ‘The Book of Acts as Source Material for the History of Early Christianity’, in
L.E. KECK; J.L. MARTYN (eds.), Studies in Luke-Acts (Nashville: Abingdon Press), pp.
258-278.
1984 John 2. A Commentary on the Gospel of John, Chapters 7-21, Hermeneia
(Philadelphia: Fortress Press).

HAHN, Ferdinand
1963 Christologische Hoheitstitel. Ihre Geschichte im frühen Christentum, Forschungen
zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen Testamentes 83 (Göttingen:
Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).

HARDY, E. R.
1945 ‘The Date of Psalm 110’, in JBL 64.3, pp. 385-390.

HARNACK, Adolf von

1908 Die Apostelgesichte, Beiträge zur Einleitung in das Neue Testament 3 (Leipzig:
J.H. Hirnichs).
1909 The Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Studies III (London: Williams &
Norgate).

HARPER, William R.; GOODSPEED, George S.

1890 ‘Studies XLIX and L: The Burial, Resurrection and Ascension. Luke 23:50-
24:53’, in The Old and New Testament Student 11.6, pp. 355-360.

HAUFE, G.
1961 ‘Entrückung und eschatologische Funktion im Spätjudentum’, in Zeitschrift für
Religions- und Geistesgeschichte 13, pp. 105-113.

HAY, David M.
1973 Glory at the Right Hand. Psalm 110 in Early Christianity, SBLMS 18 (Nashville:
Abingdon Press).

HECKEL, Ulrich
2002 Der Segen im Neuen Testament. Begriff, Formeln, Gesten mit einem praktisch-
theologischen Ausblick, WUNT 150 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

HEINE, Ronald E. (transl.)

1989 ORIGEN, Commentary on the Gospel according to John, The Fathers of the Church
80 (Washington: The Catholic University of America Press).

136
HENGEL, Martin
1991 ‘Psalm 110 und die Erhöhung des Auferstandenen zur Rechten Gottes’, in Cilliers
BREYTENBACH, Henning PAULSEN (eds.), Anfänge der Christologie. Festschrift für
Ferdinand Hahn zum 65. Geburtstag (Göttingen: Vanderhock & Ruprecht), pp. 43-73.
1995.1 ‘“Sit at My Right Hand!” The Enthronement of Christ at the Right Hand of God
and Psalm 110:1’, in HENGEL, Studies in Early Christology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark),
pp. 119-225.
1995.2 ‘The Geography of Palestine in Acts’, in Richard BAUCKHAM (ed.), The Book of
Acts in Its Palestinian Setting, The Book of Acts in Its First Century Setting 4 (Grand
Rapids: William B. Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster Press).

HENZE, Matthias
2004 ‘Review of Rivka NIR, The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption
in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch’, in Review of Biblical Literature 6/2004
[http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/3410_3724.pdf] (10/08/2010).

HENNECKE, E.; SCHNEEMELCHER, W.

1963 New Testament Apocrypha, vol. 1, R. McL. Wilson (transl.) (London: Lutterworth
Press).

HILBER, John W.
2003 ‘Psalm CX in the Light of Assyrian Prophecies’, in VetT 53.3, pp. 353-366.

HERR, Larry G.
1997 ‘Kings’, in Douglas R. CLARK; John C. BRUNT (eds.), Introducing the Bible, vol. 1
– The Old Testament and Intertestamental Literature (Oxford: University Press of
America), pp. 221-234.

HESS, Richard S.
2008 ‘Kings’, in Kevin J. VANHOOZER et. al. (eds.), Theological Interpretation of the
Old Testament. A Book-by-Book Survey (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/SPCK), pp.
119-123.

HILL, Scott D.
1992 ‘The Local Hero in Palestine in Comparative Perspective’, in Robert B. COOTE,
Elijah and Elisha in Socioliterary Perspective, SBLSS (Atlanta: Scholars Press), pp. 37-
73.

HIMMELFARB, Martha
1991 ‘Revelation and Rapture: The Transformation of the Visionary in the Ascent
Apocalypses’, in John J. COLLINS, James H. CHARLESWORTH (eds.), Mysteries and
Revelations. Apocalyptic Studies since the Uppsala Colloquium, JSPSup 9 (Sheffield:
SAP), pp. 79-90.
1993 Ascent to Heaven in Jewish and Christian Apocalypses (Oxford: OUP).

HOBBS, T.R.
1985 2 Kings, WBC 13 (Waco: Word Books).
137
HOGAN, Karina Martin
2008 Theologies in Conflict in 4 Ezra: Wisdom Debate and Apocalyptic Solution,
JSJSup 130 (Leiden: Brill).

HOLLADAY, Carl R.
1989 Fragments from Hellenistic Jewish Authors 2 - Poets. The Epic Poets Theodotus
and Philo and Ezekiel the Tragedian, Text and Translations 30/Pseudepigrapha Series
12 (Atlanta: Scholars Press/Society of Biblical Literature).

HOLMES, Michael W. (ed. & transl.)

2007 The Apostolic Fathers. Greek Texts and English Translations, 3rd edition (Grand
Rapids: Baker Academic).

HOUTMAN, Cornelis
1993 Der Himmel im Alten Testament. Israels Weltbild und Weltanschauung,
Oudtestamentische Studiën 30 (Leiden: Brill).

JACKSON, David R.
2004 Enochic Judaism. Three Defining Paradigm Exemplars, Library of Second
Temple Studies 49 (London: T&T Clark).

JAMES, Montague Rhodes

1893 Apocrypha Anecdota: A collection of Thirteen Apocryphal Books and Fragments,
Text and Studies 2.3/Contributions to Biblical and Patristic Literature (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press).

JEFFERSON, Hellen Genevive

1954 ‘Is Psalm 110 Canaanite?’, in JBL 73.3, pp. 152-156.

JERVELL, Jacob
1996 The Theology of the Acts of the Apostles, New Testament Theology Series
(Cambridge: CUP).
1998 Die Apostelgeschichte, KEK 3 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).

JOHNSON, Luke Timothy

1991 The Gospel of Luke, SP 3 (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press,).
1992 The Acts of the Apostles, SP 5 (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press).

JUST, Arthur A. Jr. (ed.)

2003 Luke, ACCS – NT 3 (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press).

KANNENGIESSER, Charles
2004 Handbook of Patristic Exegesis. The Bible in Ancient Christianity, 2 vols. (Leiden:
Brill).

KARAVIDOPOULOS, Ioannis
2001 Evanghelia după Marcu, Comentarii la Noul Testament 2, Sabin Preda (transl.)
(Bucureşti: Ed. Bizantină).
138
KARRER, Martin
1998 Jesus Christus im Neuen Testament, Grundrisse zum Neuen Testament/Das Neue
Testament Deutsch, Ergänzungsreihe 11 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht).

KARRIS, Robert J.
1995 ‘The Gospel According to Luke’, in Raymond E. BROWN, Joseph A. FITZMYER,
Roland E. MURPHY (eds.), The New Jerome Biblical Commentary (NJBC) (London:
Burns and Oates).

KESICH, Veselin
1982 The First Day of the New Creation. The Resurrection and the Christian Faith
(Crestwood: SVS Press).
1992 The Gospel Image of Christ (Crestwood: SVS Press).

KLEIN, Hans; MIHOC, Vasile; NIEBUHR, Karl-Wilhelm (eds.)

2009 Das Gebet im Neuen Testament. Vierte europäische orthodox-wesliche
Exegetenkonferenz in Sambata de Sus, 4.-8. August 2007, WUNT 249 (Tübingen:
J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

KLIJN, A.F.J.
1989 ‘Recent Developments in the Study of the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch’, in JSP
4, pp. 4-7.

KNIBB, Michael A.
1978 The Ethiopic Book of Enoch, vol. 2 – Introduction, Translation and Commentary
(Oxford: Clarendon Press).
1999 ‘Eschatology and Messianism’, in Peter W. FLINT, James C. VANDERKAM (eds.),
The Dead Sea Scrolls after Fifty Years. A Comprehensive Assessment, vol. 2, Studies on
the Texts of the Desert of Judah 30 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 379-402.

KNIGHT, Jonathan
1995 The Ascension of Isaiah (Sheffield: SAP).
1996 Disciples of the Beloved One. The Christology, Social Setting and Theological
Context of the Ascension of Isaiah, JSPSup 18 (Sheffield: SAP).

KNIGHTS, Chris H.
1997 ‘A Century of Research into the Story/Apocalypse of Zosimus and/or the History
of the Rechabites’, in JSP 8.15, pp. 53-66.

KNIGHTS, Chris H.
1998 ‘The Abode of the Blessed: A Source of the Story of Zosimus?’, in JSP 9.17, pp.
79-93.

KNOHL, Israel
2009 ‘Melchizedek: Union of Kingship and Priesthood’, in Ruth A CLEMENTS, Daniel
R. SCHWARTZ (eds.), Text, Thought, and Practice in Qumran and Early Christianity.
Proceedings of the Ninth International Symposium of the Orion Center for the Study of
139
the Dead Sea Scrolls and Associated Literature, Jointly Sponsored by the Hebrew
University Center for the Study of Christianity, 11-13 January, 2004, Studies on the
Texts of the Desert of Judah 84 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 255-266.

KOSANKE, Charles G.
1993 Encounters with the Risen Jesus in Luke-Acts (Rome: Pontificia Universitas
Gregoriana).

KÖSTER, Helmut
1957 Synoptische Überlieferung bei den Apostolischen Vätern, Texte und
Untersuchungen zur Geschichte der altchristlichen Literatur 65 (5.10) (Berlin:
Akademie Verlag).

KÜMMEL, W. G.
1975 Introduction to the New Testament (London: SCM Press).

KURZ, William S.
1993 Reading Luke-Acts. Dynamics of Biblical Narrative (Louisville: Westminster/John
Knox Press).

KVANVIG, Helge S.
2005 ‘Jubilees - Read as a Narrative’, in Gabriele BOCCACCINI (ed.), Enoch and
Qumran Origins. New Light on a Forgotten Connection (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans), pp.
75-83.

LARRAÑAGA, Victorien C.
1938 L’Ascension de Notre-Seigneur dans la Nouveau Testament, G. Cazaux (transl.),
Scripta Pontificii Instituti Biblici 50 (Roma: Pontifical Biblical Institute).

LASH, Ephrem (transl.)

1995 ROMANOS THE MELODIST, On the Life of Christ: Kontakia, The Sacred Literature
Series (San Francisco: HarperCollins Publishers).

LEE, David
1999 Luke’s Stories of Jesus. Theological Reading of the Gospel Narrative and the
Legacy of Hans Frei, JSNTSup 185 (Sheffield: SAP).

LEE, Dorothy A.
1995 ‘Partnership in Easter Faith: The Role of Mary Magdalene and Thomas in John
20’, in JSNT 58, p. 37-49.

LEE, Thomas R.
1986 Studies in the Form of Sirach 44-50, SBLDS 75 (Atlanta: Scholars Press).

LEEMHUIS, Fred
1989 ‘The Arabic Version of the Apocalypse of Baruch: a Christian Text?’, in JSP 4,
pp. 19-26.

140
LEIBNER, Uzi
2009 Settlement and History in Hellenistic, Roman and Byzantine Galilee, Text and
Studies in Ancient Judaism 127 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

LEVISON, John R.
1988 Portraits of Adam in Early Judaism. From Sirach to 2 Baruch, JSPSup 1
(Sheffield: JSOT Press).

LICHTENBERGER, Hermann (ed.)

1974-2003 Apokalypsen, JSHRZ 5.1-9 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus).

LIED, Liv Ingeborg

2005 ‘Review of Rivka NIR, The Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption
in the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch’, in Journal of Semitic Studies 50.2, pp. 403-405.

LIENHARD, Joseph T. (transl.)

1996 ORIGEN, ‘Fragment 257 (on Luke 24:50)’, in Homilies on Luke, Fragments on
Luke, The Fathers of the Church 94 (Washington: The Catholic University of America
Press).

LINDARS, Barnabas
1960 ‘The Composition of John XX’, in NTS 7.1, pp. 142-147.

LILLIE, William
1965 ‘The Empty Tomb and the Resurrection’, in Dennis Eric NINEHAM, Historicity
and Chronology in the New Testament, Theological Collections 6 (London: SPCK), pp.
117-134.

LOADER, William
1992 The Christology of the Fourth Gospel. Structure and Issues, BBET 23 (Frankfurt
am Main: Peter Lang).

LOHFINK, Gerhard
1971 Die Himmelfahrt Jesu. Untersuchungen zu den Himmelfahrts- und
Erhöhungstexten bei Lukas, Studien zum Alten und Neuen Testament 26 (München:
Kösel-Verlag).

LONGENECKER, Bruce W.
1995 2 Esdras (Sheffield: SAP).

LOUTH, Andrew (ed.)

2001 Genesis I-II, ACCS – OT 1 (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press).

LUZARRAGA, J.
1973 Las Tradiciones de la Nube en la Biblia y en el Judaismo Primitivo, AnBib 54
(Roma: Biblical Institute Press).

MACKENZIE, Iain M.
141
2002 Irenaeus’s Demonstration of the Apostolic Preaching. A theological commentary
and translation (Aldershot: Ashgate)

MAILE, John F.
1986 ‘The Ascension in Luke-Acts’, in Tyndale Bulletin 37, pp. 29-59.

MARGUERAT, Daniel
2002 The first Christian historian: writing the ‘Acts of the Apostles’, SNTS MS 121
(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

MARSHALL, I. Howard
1978 The Gospel of Luke. A Commentary on the Greek Text, New International Greek
Testament Commentary (Carlisle: Paternoster Press/Grand Rapids: William B.
Eerdmans).
2006 ‘Review of GREGORY 2003’, in Scottish Journal of Theology 59.1, pp. 121-124.

MARSCHLER, Thomas
2003 Auferstehung und Himmelfahrt Christi in der scholastischen Theologie bis zu
Thomas von Aquin 1, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie und Theologie des
Mittelalters. Texte und Untersuchungen (neue folge) 64 (Münster: Aschendorff Verlag).

MARSH, Clive; MOYISE, Steve

2006 Jesus and the Gospels, second edition, T&T Clark Approaches to Biblical Studies
(London: T&T Clark).

MARTIN, Francis (ed.)

2006 Acts, ACCS – NT 5 (Downers Grove, Illinois: InterVarsity Press).

MARTIN, Lawrence T.; HURST, David (transl.)

1991, BEDE, Homilies on the Gospels 2, Cistercian Studies Series 111 (Kalamazoo:
Cistercian Publications).

MAY, Herbert G. (ed.)

1976 Oxford Bible Atlas, 2nd Edition (London: OUP).

MCDONALD, Mary Francis (transl.)

1964 LACTANTIUS, The Divine Institutes, The Fathers of the Church 49 (Washington:
The Catholic University of America Press).

MCGEHEE, Michael
1986 ‘A Less Theological Reading of John 20:17’, in JBL 105.2, pp. 299-302.

METZGER, Bruce M.
1957 An Introduction to the Apocrypha (New York: OUP).
1969 ‘The Meaning of Christ’s Ascension’, in J. M. MYERS, O. REIMHERR, H. N.
BREAM, Search the Scriptures. New Testament Studies in Honor of Raymond T. Stamm,
Gettysburg Theological Studies 3 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 118-128.

142
1983 The New Testament, its background, growth, and content, 2nd Edition (Nashville:
Abingdon Press).
1987 The Canon of the New Testament. Its Origin, Development, and Significance
(Oxford: Clarendon Press).
1994 A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament, 2nd Edition (Stuttgart:
Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft/United Bible Societies).

MEYER, Eduard
1921 Ursprung und Anfänge des Christentums, vol. 1 (Stuttgart: J.G. Cotta).

MIHOC, Vasile; MIHOC, Daniel; MIHOC, Ioan

2001 Introducere în Studiul Noului Testament, vol. 1, 2nd edition (Sibiu: Teofania).

MILIK, J.T.
1976 The Books of Enoch. Aramaic Fragments of Qumrân Cave 4 (Oxford: Clarendon
Press).

MIRCEA, Ioan
1995 Dicționar al Noului Testament (București: IBMBOR).

MITTMANN-RICHERT, Ulrike
2000 Historische und legendarische Erzählungen, JSHRZ 6.1, fasc. 1 – Supplementa
(Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus).

MOBERLY, R.W.L.
2009 The Theology of the Book of Genesis, Old Testament Theology Series
(Cambridge: CUP).

MOLONEY, Francis J.
1998 The Gospel of John, SP 4 (Collegeville: The Liturgical Press,).

MORITZ, Thorsten
2005 ‘Mark’, in Kevin J. VANHOOZER (ed.), Theological Interpretation of the New
Testament. A Book-by-Book Survey (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic/London: SPCK),
pp. 39-49.

MORRICE, William G.
1984 Joy in the New Testament (Exeter: Paternoster Press).

MORRIS, Leon
1988.1 Reflections on the Gospel of John, vol. 4 – Crucified and Risen. John 17-21
(Grand Rapids: Baker Book House).
1988.2 Luke: An Introduction and Commentary, 2nd edition, TynNTC 3 (Grand Rapids:
Wm. B. Eerdmans).

MOULE, C.F.D.
1956-1957 ‘The Ascension. Acts i.9’, in The Expository Times 68, pp. 205-209.

143
MULDER, Otto
2003 Simon the High Priest in Sirach 50. An Exegetical Study of the Significance of
Simon the High Priest as Climax to the Praise of the Fathers in Ben Sira’s Concept of
the History of Israel, JSJSup 78 (Leiden: Brill).

MUNCK, Johannes
1967 The Acts of the Apostles, AB 31 (Garden City: Doubleday).

MURPHY, Frederick J.
1985 The Structure and Meaning of Second Baruch, SBLDS 78 (Atlanta: Scholars
Press).

MYERS, Jacob M.
1974 I and II Esdras, AB 42 (Garden City, New York: Doubleday).

NEIRYNCK, Frans
1991 Evangelica II. 1982-1991 Collected Essays, BETL 99 (Leuven: Leuven University
Press).

NESTLE-ALAND (eds.),
2006 Novum Testamentum Graece, Barbara et Kurt ALAND, Johannes
KARAVIDOPOULOUS, Carlo M. MARTINI, Bruce M. METZGER (eds.), 27. revidierte
Auflage, 9. korrigierter Druck (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft).
2008 Novum Testamentum Latine, Kurt ALAND et Barbara ALAND (eds.), 2.
neubearbeitete Auflage, 6. Druck (Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft).

NEWMAN, Barclay M.
1971 A Concise Greek-English Dictionary of the New Testament (Stuttgart: Deutsche
Bibelgesellschaft/United Bible Societies).

NICHOLSON, Godfrey C.
1983 Death as Departure. The Johannine Descent-Ascent Schema, SBLDS 63 (Chico:
Scholars Press).

NICKELSBURG, George W.E.

2001 1 Enoch 1: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch, Chapters 1-36; 81-108,
Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).

NIKOLSKY, Ronit
2002 ‘The History of the Rechabites and the Jeremiah Literature’, in JSP 13.2, pp. 185-
207.

NIR, Rivka
2003 Destruction of Jerusalem and the Idea of Redemption in the Syriac Apocalypse of
Baruch, Early Judaism and Its Literature 20/Academia Biblica 11 (Leiden: Brill).

NOLLAND, John
1993 Luke 18:35-24:53, WBC 35c (Dallas: Word Books).
144
NORRIS, Richard A.
2004 ‘Apocryphal writings and Acts of the martyrs’, in Frances YOUNG; Lewis AYRES;
Andrew LOUTH (eds.), The Cambridge History of Early Christian Literature
(Cambridge: CUP), pp. 28-35.

ODEBERG, Hugo
1973 3 Enoch or The Hebrew Book of Enoch, The Library of Biblical Studies (New
York: KTAV Publishing House).

ODEN, Thomas C.; HALL, Christopher A. (eds.)

1998 Mark, ACCS – NT 2 (Chicago: Fitzroy Dearborn Publishers).

OEGEMA, Gerbern S.
2001 Apokalypsen, JSHRZ 6.1, fasc. 5 – Supplementa (Gütersloh: Gütersloher
Verlaghaus).

ÖHLER, Markus
1997 Elia im Neuen Testament. Untersuchungen zur Bedeutung des alttestamentlichen
Propheten im frühen Christentum, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die Neutestamentliche
Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 88 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter).

ORLOV, Andrei A.
2007 From Apocalypticism to Merkabah Mysticism: Studies in the Slavonic
Pseudepigrapha, JSJSup 114 (Leiden: Brill).

OSWALD, Nico
1982 ‘Elia II’, in Gerhard MÜLLER; Gerhard KRAUSE et. al. (eds.), Theologische
Realenzyklopädie 9 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter), pp. 502-504.

OUSPENSKY, Leonid; LOSSKY, Vladimir

1982 The Meaning of Icons, G.E.H. Palmer & E. Kadloubovsky (transl.), 2nd edition
(Crestwood: SVS Press).

PAGET, James Carleton

2004 ‘Review of GREGORY 2003’, in Journal of Ecclesiastical History 55.4, pp. 742-
744

PARK, Sejin
2008 Pentecost and Sinai. The Festival of Weeks as a Celebration of the Sinai Event,
Library of Hebrew Bible/Old Testament Studies 342 (London: T&T Clark).

PARSONS, Mikeal C.
1986 ‘A Christological Tendency in P75’, in JBL 105.5, pp. 463-479.
1987 The Departure of Jesus in Luke-Acts: The Ascension Narratives in Context,
JSNTSup 21 (Sheffield: JSOT Press).
2007 Luke. Storyteller, Interpreter, Evangelist (Peabody: Hendrickson).

PARSONS, Mikeal C.; PERVO, Richard I.

145
1993 Rethinking the Unity of Luke and Acts (Minneapolis: Fortress Press).

PELIKAN, Jaroslav
2005 Acts, Brazos Theological Commentary on the Bible (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press).

PELLEGRINO, Michele
1954 ‘L’Ascensione nei Padri della Chiesa’, in Il Simbolo XI, pp. 53-83, republ. in
PELLEGRINO, Ricerche Patristiche (1938-1980) (Torino: Bottega d’Erasmo, 1982), pp.
359-389.

PERVO, Richard I.
1987 Profit with delight: the literary genre of the Acts of the Apostles (Philadelphia:
Fortress Press).
2009 Acts. A Commentary, Hermeneia (Mineapolis: Fortress Press).

PESCH, Rudolf
1986 Die Apostelgeschichte 1, EKK 5.1 (Zürich: Benzinger Verlag/Neukirchen-Vylun:
Neukirchner Verlag).

PHILLIPS, Thomas E.
2006 ‘The Genre of Acts: Moving Toward a Consensus?’, in Currents in Biblical
Research 4.3, pp. 365-396.

PLUMMER, Alfred
1901 The Gospel According to S. Luke, ICC (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

POIROT, Éliane
1997 Les Prophètes Élie et Élisée dans la Littérature Chrétienne Ancienne, Collection
Monastica (Brepolis: Abbaye de Bellefontaine).

POTTERIE, Ignace de la
1984 ‘Genèse de la Foi Pascale D’après Jn. 20’, in NTS 30.1, pp. 26-49.

PREDA, Constantin
2005 Propovăduirea Apostolică. Structuri Retorice în Faptele Apostolilor (Bucureşti:
IBMBOR).

REDDISH, Mitchel G. (ed.)

1995 Apocalyptic Literature: A Reader (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers).

RENTERÍA, Hoover, Tamis

1992 ‘The Elijah/Elisha Stories: A Socio-cultural Analysis of Prophets and People in
Ninth-Century B.C.E. Israel’, in Robert B. COOTE (ed.), Elijah and Elisha in
Socioliterary Perspective, SBLSS (Atlanta: Scholars Press), pp. 75-126.

RIUS-CAMPS, Joseph; READ-HEIMERDINGER, Jenny

2004 The Message of Acts in Codex Bezae. A Comparison with the Alexandrian
Tradition, vol. 1: Acts 1:1-5:42 – Jerusalem, JSNTSup 257 (London: T & T Clark).
146
ROBERTS, Alexander; DONALDSON, James (eds.)
1867 The Writings of the Apostolic Fathers, A. Roberts; J. Donaldson; F. Crombie
(transl.), ANCL 1 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).
1867 The Writings of Justin Martyr and Athenagoras, Marcus Dods; George Reith; B.P.
Pratten (transl.), ANCL 2 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).
1868 The Writings of Irenaeus 1, Alexander Roberts; W.H. Rambaut (transl.), ANCL 5
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark).
1871 The Works of Lactantius. With the Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs and
Fragments of the Second and Third Centuries, William Fletcher (transl.), ANCL 22
(Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

ROBINSON, J.
1976 The Second Book of Kings, The Cambridge Bible Commentary (Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press).

ROBINSON, James M. (ed.)

1988 The Nag Hammadi Library in English, 3rd revised edition (Leiden: Brill).

ROWE, C. Kavin
2005 ‘History, Hermeneutics and the Unity of Luke–Acts’, in JSNT 28.2, pp. 131-157.
2007 ‘Literary Unity and reception History: Reading Luke-Acts as Luke and Acts’, in
JSNT 29.4, pp. 449-457.

RUBINSTEIN, Arie
1962 ‘Observations on the Slavonic Book of Enoch’, in Journal of Jewish Studies 13.1-
4, pp. 1-21.

RUITEN, Jacques T.A.G.M. van

2000 Primaeval History Interpreted. The Rewriting of Genesis 1-11 in the book of
Jubilees, JSJSup 66 (Leiden: Brill).

RUZER, Serge
2008 ‘Jesus’ Crucifixion in Luke and Acts. The Search for a Meaning vis-à-vis the
Biblical Pattern of Persecuted Prophet’, in Lutz DOERING; Hans-Günther WAUBKE;
Florian WILK (eds.), Judaistik und neutestamentliche Wissenschaft. Standorte –
Grenzen – Beziehungen, Forschungen zur Religion und Literatur des Alten und Neuen
Testaments 226 (Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht), pp. 173-191.

SABBE, Maurits
1991 Studia Neotestamentica. Collected Essays, BETL 98 (Leuven: Leuven University
Press).

SABOURIN, Léopold
1987 L’évangile de Luc. Introduction et Commentaire (Roma: Pontificia Università
Gregoriana).

SACK, Robert David

147
1980 Conceptions of Space in Social Thought. A Geographic Perspective (London:
Macmillan).

SATRAN, David
1995 Biblical Prophets in Byzantine Palestine. Reassesing the Lives of the Prophets,
Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 11 (Leiden: Brill).

SAUER, Georg
2000 Jesus Sirach/Ben Sira, Das Alte Testament Deutsch – Apokryphen 1 (Göttingen:
Vanderhoeck & Ruprecht).

SAYLER, Gwendolyn B.
1984 Have the Promises Failed? A Literary Analysis of 2 Baruch, SBLDS 72 (Chico,
California: Scholars Press).

SCHAFF, Philip (ed.)

1888 AUGUSTINE, Harmony of the Gospels, NPNF 1.6 (New York: The Christian
Literature Company).
1997 JOHN CHRYSOSTOM, Homilies on the Acts of the Apostles and the Epistle to the
Romans, NPNF 1.11 (Edinburgh: T&T Clark/Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans).

SCHILLE, Gottfried
1966 ‘Die Himmelfahrt’, in ZNW 57.3-4, pp. 183–199.

SCHMIDT, Nathaniel
1921 ‘The Two Recensions of Slavonic Enoch’, in Journal of the American Oriental
Society 41, pp. 307-312.

SCHMOLLER, Alfred
2008 Handkonkordanz zum griechischen Neuen Testament, 8. Auflage, 6. Druck
(Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft).

SCHRADER, Richard J. et al. (ed. & transl.)

1987 ARATOR, On the Acts of the Apostles (De Actibus Apostolorum), The American
Academy of Religion – Classics in Religious Studies 6 (Atlanta: Scholars Press).

SCHRAMM, Tim
1971 Der Markus-Stoff bei Lukas. Eine Literarkritische und Redaktionsgeschichtliche
Untersuchung, SNTS MS 14 (Cambridge: CUP).

SCHWEMER, Anna Maria

1995/1996 Studien zu den frühjüdischen Prophetenlegenden. Vitae Prophetarum, 2
vols., Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum 50 (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr/Paul
Siebeck).
1997 ‘Vitae Prophetarum’, in Historische und legendarische Erzählungen, JSHRZ 1.7,
fasc. 5 (Gütersloh: Gütersloher Verlaghaus), pp. 539-658.

148
2003 ‘Jesus Christus als Prophet, König und Priester. Das munus triplex und die frühe
Christologie’, in Martin HENGEL; Anna Maria SCHWEMER, Der messianische Anspruch
Jesu und die Anfänge der Christologie. Vier Studien, WUNT 138 (Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck), pp. 165-230.

SCOTT, James M.
2005 On Earth as in Heaven. The Restoration of Sacred Time and Sacred Space in the
Book of Jubilees, JSJSup 91 (Leiden: Brill).

SCHORK, R.J.
1995 Sacred Song from the Byzantine Pulpit: Romanos the Melodist (Gainesville:
University Press of Florida).

SEGAL, Michael
2007 The Book of Jubilees. Rewritten Bible, Redaction, Ideology and Theology, JSJSup
117 (Leiden: Brill).

SHEPHERD, Thomas R.
2009 ‘Narrative Analysis as a Text Critical Tool: Mark 16 in Codex W as a Test Case’,
in JSNT 32.1, pp. 77-97.

SLEEMAN, Matthew
2009 Geography and the Ascension Narrative in Acts, SNTS MS 146 (Cambridge:
CUP).

SMITH, Daniel A.
2003 ‘Revisiting the Empty Tomb: The Post-Mortem Vindication of Jesus in Mark and
Q’, in NovT 45.2, pp. 123-137.
2006 The Post-Mortem Vindication of Jesus in the Sayings Gospel Q, LNTS 338
(London: T&T Clark).

SMITH, Morton
1992 ‘Two Ascended to Heaven – Jesus and the Author of 4Q491’, in CHARLESWORTH,
Jesus and the Dead Sea Scrolls, ABRL (New York: Doubleday), pp. 290-301.

SNAITH, John G.
1974 Ecclesiasticus, or the Wisdom of Jesus son of Sirach, The Cambridge Bible
Commentary (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

SOJA, Edward W.
1989 Postmodern Geographies. The Reassetion of Space in Critical Social Theory
(London: Verso).
1996 Thirdspace. Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-And-Imagined Places
(Oxford: Blackwell).
2000 Postmetropolis. Critical Studies of Cities and Regions (Oxford: Blackwell).

SPIQ, Ceslas

149
1979 Lexique Théologique du Nouveau Testament (Fribourg: Cerf).

STĂNILOAE, Dumitru
1978 Teologia Dogmatică Ortodoxă 2 (Bucureşti: IBMBOR).
1991 Chipul Evanghelic al lui Iisus Hristos (Sibiu: Ed. Centrului Mitropolitan).

STERLING, Gregory E.
1992 Historiography and Self-Definition. Josephos, Luke-Acts and Apologetic
Historiography, NovTSup 64 (Leiden: Brill).

STEMPVOORT, P.A.
1958-1959 ‘The Interpretation of the Ascension in Luke and Acts’, in NTS 5, pp. 30-42.

STEWART-SYKES, Alistair (transl.)

2001 MELITO OF SARDIS, On Pascha. With the Fragments of Melito and Other Material
Related to the Quartodecimans, Popular Patristics Series (Crestwood: SVS Press).

STONE, Michael E.
1989 Features of Eschatology of IV Ezra (Atlanta: Scholars Press,).
1990 Fourth Ezra: A Commentary on the Book of Fourth Ezra, Hermeneia
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press).
1991 Selected Studies in Pseudepigrapha and Apocrypha – With special reference to
the Armenian Tradition, Studia in Veteris Testamenti Pseudepigrapha 9 (Leiden: Brill).
1992 A History of the Literature of Adam and Eve, Society of Biblical Literature – Early
Judaism and Its Literature 3 (Atlanta: Scholars Press).
2006 ‘The Concept of Messiah in IV Ezra’, in Apocrypha, Pseudepigrapha and
Armenian Studies: Collected Papers, vol. 1 (Leuven: Peeters/Department of Oriental
Studies), pp. 321-338.

STRAUß, D.F.
1840 Das Leben Jesu kritisch bearbeitet 2 (Tübingen: J.C.B. Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

STYLER, G.M.
1981 ‘The priority of Mark’, in C.F.D. MOULE, The Birth of the New Testament, 3rd
edition, Black’s New Testament Commentaries (London: Adam & Charles Black), pp.
285-316.

SUPPOGU, Joseph
2007 Adaptation of the Gospel Tradition in Luke (Delhi: ISPCK).

SWARTZ, Michael D.
2006 ‘Mystical Texts’, in Shmuel SAFRAI, Zeev SAFRAI, Joshua SCHWARTZ, Peter J.
TOMSON (eds.), The Literature of the Sages. Second Part: Midrash and Targum,
Liturgy, Poetry, Mysticism, Contracts, Inscriptions, Ancient Science and the Languages
of Rabbinic Literature, Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum II
(Assen: Royal Van Gorcum/Fortress Press), pp. 393-422.

150
SWEENEY, Marvin A.
2007 I & II Kings. A Commentary, The Old Testament Library (Louisville: Westminster
John Knox Press).

SWETE, Henry Barclay

1908 The Appearances of our Lord after the Passion. A Study in the earliest Christian
Tradition (London: Macmillan & Co.).
1911 The Ascended Christ. A Study in the earliest Christian Teaching (London:
Macmillan & Co.).

TALBERT, C.H.
1974 Literary Patterns, Theological Themes and the Genre of Luke-Acts, SBLMS 20
(Missoula: Scholars Press).

TALLEY, Thomas J.
1986 The Origins of the Liturgical Year (New York: Pueblo Publishing Company).

TARAZI, Paul Nadim

1999 The New Testament: An Introduction, vol. 1 – Paul and Mark (Crestwood: SVS
Press).
2001 The New Testament: An Introduction, vol. 2 – Luke and Acts (Crestwood: SVS
Press).
2004 The New Testament: An Introduction, vol. 3 – Johanine Writings (Crestwood:
SVS Press).

TANNENHILL, R.
1984 ‘The Composition of Acts 3-5: Narrative Development and Echo Effect’, Society
of Biblical Literature 1984 Seminar Papers (Chico: Scholars Press), pp. 217-240.

TASKER, R.V.G.
1960 The Gospel According to St. John. An Introduction and Commentary, TynNTC 4
(Leicester: Inter-Varsity Press/Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans).

TENNEY, Merrill C.
1986 New Testament Survey (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans).

THAYER, Joseph Henry

1889 A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Regency
Reference Library/Zondervan).

THEOPHYLACT OF OHRID
1998 Comentar la Evanghelia de la Ioan (Oradea: Pelerinul Român).

THÜSING, Wilhelm
1995 ‘Die joanneische Theologie als Verkündigung der Größe Gottes’, in Thomas
SÖDING (ed.), Studien zur neutestamentlichen Theologie, WUNT 82 (Tübingen: JCB
Mohr/Paul Siebeck), pp. 124-134.

151
TILBORG, Sjef van; COUNET, Patrick Chatelion
2000 Jesus’ Appearances and Disappearances in Luke 24, BIS 45 (Leiden: Brill).

TORRANCE, Thomas F.
1998 Space, Time and Resurrection, 2nd edition (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

TORREY, Charles Cutler

1946 The Lives of the Prophets: Greek Text and Translation, SBLMS 1 (Philadelphia:
Society of Biblical Literature and Exegesis).

TROMP, Johannes
2005 The Life of Adam and Eve in Greek: A critical edition, Pseudepigrapha Veteris
Testamenti Graece, v. 6 (Leiden: Brill,).

TYSON, Joseph B.
2006 Marcion and Luke. A Defining Struggle (Columbia: University of South Carolina
Press).

UPTON, Bridget Gilfillan

2006 Hearing Mark’s Endings. Listening to Ancient Popular Texts through Speech Act
Theory, BIS 79 (Leiden: Brill).

VAILLANT, A.
1952 Le Livre des Secrets d’Henoch. Texte Slave et Traduction Française (Paris:
L’institut d’Études Slaves).

VANDERKAM, James C.
1977 Textual and Historical Studies in the Book of Jubilees, Harvard Semitic
Monographs 14 (Missoula: Scholars Press/Harvard Semitic Museum).
2000 From Revelation to Canon. Studies in the Hebrew Bible and Second Temple
Literature, JSJSup 62 (Leiden: Brill,).
2001 The Book of Jubilees (Sheffield: SAP,).

VERHEYDEN, J.
1989 ‘L’Ascension d’Isaïe et l’Évangile de Matthieu. Examen de AI 3 :13-18’, in Jean-
Marie SEVRIN (ed.), The New Testament in Early Christianity, BETL 86 (Leuven:
Leuven University Press), pp. 246-274.
1999 The Unity of Luke-Acts (Leuven: Leuven University Press).

VERZAN, Sabin
1994 ‘Faptele Apostolilor (capitolele 1 şi 2). Note exegetice’, in Ortodoxia 46.1, pp. 28-
115.

WALTERS, Patricia
2008 The Assumed Authorial Unity of Luke and Acts: a Reassessment of Evidence,
SNTS MS 145 (Cambridge: CUP).

WATSON, Francis
152
1997 Text and Truth. Redefining Biblical Theology (Edinburgh: T&T Clark).

WENHAM, David
2005 ‘The Purpose of Luke-Acts: Israel’s story in the Context of the Roman Empire’, in
Craig G. BARTHOLOMEW; Joel B. GREEN; Anthony C. THINSELTON (eds.), Reading
Luke. Interpretation, Reflection, Formation, Scripture and Hermeneutics 6 (Milton
Keynes: Paternoster Press/Grand Rapids: Zondervan), pp. 79-103.

WENHAM, Gordon J.
1987 Genesis 1-15, Word Biblical Commentary 1 (Waco: Word Books).

WESTERMANN, Claus
1974 Genesis, Biblischer Kommentar – Altes Testament I/1 (Neukirchen-Vluyn:
Neukirchener Verlag).

WILLETT, Tom W.
1989 Eschatology in the Theodicies of 2 Baruch and 4 Ezra, JSPSup 4 (Sheffield: SAP).

WILLIAMS, David J.
1990 Acts, New International Biblical Commentary 5 (Peabody: Hendrickson/Carlisle:
Paternoster Press).

WILSON, S.G.
1968 ‘The Ascension. A Critique and an Interpretation’, in ZNW 59.3-4, pp. 88-116.

WISCHMEYER, Oda
1995 Die Kultur des Buches Jesus Sirach, Beihefte zur Zeitschrift für die
Neutestamentliche Wissenschaft und die Kunde der älteren Kirche 77 (Berlin: Walter de
Gruyter)

WISE, Michael O.
2000 ‘A Study of 4Q491c, 4Q471b, 4Q427 7 and 1QHᴬ 25:35-26:10’, in Dead Sea
Discoveries 7.2, pp. 173-219.

WITAKOWSKI, Witold
1987 ‘The Origin of the “Teaching of the Apostles”’, in H.J.W. DRIJVERS; R.
LAVENANT; C. MOLENBERG; G.J. REINIK (eds.), IV Symposium Syriacum 1984. Literary
Genres in Syriac Literature, Orientalia Christiana Analecta 229 (Roma: Institutum
Studiorum Orientalium), pp. 161-171.

WITHERINGTON III, Ben

1998 The Acts of the Apostles. A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B.
Eerdmans/Carlisle: Paternoster Press).

WRIGHT, J. Edward
1997 ‘The Social Setting of the Syriac Apocalypse of Baruch’, in JSP 16, pp. 83-98.
2004 ‘Whither Elijah? The Ascension of Elijah in Biblical and Extrabiblical Traditions’,
in Esther G. CHAZON, David SATRAN, Ruth A. CLEMENTS (eds.), Things Revealed.
153
Studies in Early Jewish and Christian Literature in Honor of Michael E. Stone, JSJSup
89 (Leiden: Brill), pp. 123-138.

WYBREW, Hugh
2001 Risen with Christ. Eastertide in the Orthodox Church (London: SPCK).

ZIMMERMANN, Johannes
1998 Messianische Texte aus Qumran. Königliche, priesterliche und prophetische
Messiasvorstellung in den Schritfunden von Qumran, WUNT 2.104 (Tübingen: J.C.B.
Mohr/Paul Siebeck).

ZWIEP, Arie W.
1996 ‘The Text of the Ascension Narratives (Luke 24:50-3; Acts 1:1-2, 9-11)’, in NTS
42.2, pp. 219-244.
1997 The Ascension of the Messiah in Lukan Christology, NovTSup 87 (Leiden: Brill).
2001 ‘Asumptus est in caelum: Rapture and Heavenly Exaltation in Early Judaism and
Luke-Acts’, in Friedrich AVEMARIE; Hermann LICHTENBERGER (eds.), Auferstehung –
Resurrection. The Fourth Durham-Tübingen Research Symposium Resurrection,
Trasfiguration and Exaltation in Old Testament, Ancient Judaism and Early
Christianity (Tübingen, September, 1999), WUNT 135 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck), pp.
323-349.
2004 Judas and the Choice of Matthias. A Study on Context and Concern of Acts 1:15-
26, WUNT 2.187 (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck).

154