Days spent on Earth after Resurrection?

[pawnraider]

According to Acts 1:3 Luke states that Jesus Christ spent forty days on Earth after the Resurrection however, in Luke 24 he leaves us with the impression that He only spent one day on Earth until His ascension. I would be most interested in your response as long as it doesn't involve guessing.

 

[PaladinValer]

Except that you forgot that the author who wrote the Gospel according to St. Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles, which clearly states that Jesus' Ascension was 40 days later.

When you read St. Luke's Gospel, it doesn't end with its last verse; the whole work doesn't end until the last verse in Acts.

 

[ebia]

According to Acts 1:3 Luke states that Jesus Christ spent forty days on Earth after the Resurrection however, in Luke 24 he leaves us with the impression that He only spent one day on Earth until His ascension. I would be most interested in your response as long as it doesn't involve guessing.

The last bit of Luke 24 gives you something like one of those rapid-fire previews of the next episode you get at the end of a tv show.

 

[pawnraider]

You're both missing the point. If you read Luke 24 it appears that Jesus ascended to heaven on the same day He rose from the dead. Whereas in Acts 1:3 it specifically states that He spent 40 days until He ascended into heaven.

 

[ebia]

You're both missing the point. If you read Luke 24 it appears that Jesus ascended to heaven on the same day He rose from the dead. Whereas in Acts 1:3 it specifically states that He spent 40 days until He ascended into heaven.

And?

I repeat what I said above. In Luke he gives a version telescoped together into a day, that he will expand out into the opening chapter of Acts. It's a literary equivalent of "next week, on The Bill..."

 

[OzSpen]

You're both missing the point. If you read Luke 24 it appears that Jesus ascended to heaven on the same day He rose from the dead. Whereas in Acts 1:3 it specifically states that He spent 40 days until He ascended into heaven.

Pawnraider,

I note that you do not give any specific verse(s) from Luke 24 to prove your point. You give no reasoning or exposition that leads you to this conclusion.

Do you know what that does for me? It creates doubt in my mind as to your intentions for raising this point.

Sincerely, Oz

 

[pawnraider]

Pawnraider,

I note that you do not give any specific verse(s) from Luke 24 to prove your point. You give no reasoning or exposition that leads you to this conclusion.

Do you know what that does for me? It creates doubt in my mind as to your intentions for raising this point.

Sincerely, Oz

I thought it should have been rather obvious that the whole chapter was to be have been consulted instead of any specific verse(s).

 

[PaladinValer]

You're both missing the point. If you read Luke 24 it appears that Jesus ascended to heaven on the same day He rose from the dead. Whereas in Acts 1:3 it specifically states that He spent 40 days until He ascended into heaven.

No, Ebia and I addressed the point. The point is, you're ignoring the fact that Acts is a continuation of St. Luke.

 

[heterodoxical]

As I was there, and had eyewitness accounts, I have empirical observation, no guessing....

please, any comment you get on here is guessing. He ascended the first day, but had 40 more days of work, and then made one final ascension. How's that? I got both sides.

According to Acts 1:3 Luke states that Jesus Christ spent forty days on Earth after the Resurrection however, in Luke 24 he leaves us with the impression that He only spent one day on Earth until His ascension. I would be most interested in your response as long as it doesn't involve guessing.

 

[ebia]

As I was there, and had eyewitness accounts, I have empirical observation, no guessing....

please, any comment you get on here is guessing. He ascended the first day, but had 40 more days of work, and then made one final ascension. How's that? I got both sides.

And lost the plot. Ascension is Jesus' enthronement in heaven, not a daily commute.

 

[heterodoxical]

And lost the plot. Ascension is Jesus' enthronement in heaven, not a daily commute.

Isn't that funny, seems someone posed the question, Who can be he who ascended except for Him that descended....

 

[ebia]

Isn't that funny, seems someone posed the question, Who can be he who ascended except for Him that descended....

I have no idea what you think that proves. The one who ascends "on the clouds of heaven" to be enthroned next to the Ancient of Days is the one who "descended" at the Annunciation.

That's a very different picture from yours.

 

[heterodoxical]

I have no idea what you think that proves. The one who ascends "on the clouds of heaven" to be enthroned next to the Ancient of Days is the one who "descended" at the Annunciation.

That's a very different picture from yours.

Oh, really I said that mostly making fun of some of the folks I have discussed wth on here.


There wasn't much room to defend a hyperbolic comment that was supposed to get chuckles. :-!

 

[Goinheix]

In the Gospels we have two different ascencions, plus a third ascencion in Acts. The problem is that we understand each escencion as a definitive entry to Heaven. More likely, Jesus spent 40 days appeasring to the disciples and then desapearing againg. That is ascending again and again. If he did keep apearing is not because he stayed but because he desapeared each time (ascencion).

The other point is that from the traditional day of resurrection to Pentecost there is almos 50 days, not 40. The answer is in http://www.christianforums.com/t7569681/

 

[ebia]

In the Gospels we have two different ascencions, plus a third ascencion in Acts. The problem is that we understand each escencion as a definitive entry to Heaven. More likely, Jesus spent 40 days appeasring to the disciples and then desapearing againg. That is ascending again and again. If he did keep apearing is not because he stayed but because he desapeared each time (ascencion).

The other point is that from the traditional day of resurrection to Pentecost there is almos 50 days, not 40. The answer is in http://www.christianforums.com/t7569681/

Ascension isn't just about disappearing though. Ascension is about enthronement. You can have as many disappearing as you want, but only one ascension.

 

[PaladinValer]

In the Gospels we have two different ascencions, plus a third ascencion in Acts. The problem is that we understand each escencion as a definitive entry to Heaven. More likely, Jesus spent 40 days appeasring to the disciples and then desapearing againg. That is ascending again and again. If he did keep apearing is not because he stayed but because he desapeared each time (ascencion).

Wrong.

As I said before, the same person who wrote the Gospel according to St. Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles. There are therefore not two different accounts but the same one.

This is why the Bible is a dumb and difficult book...people don't know how to read it worth a squat. It is the Book of the Church, not individuals to make it say whatever they want it to.

Furthermore, Ebia is correct in that the Ascension is the Incarnate Son's Enthrownment. There is only one Ascension because there is only one Enthrownment. Jesus appeared off and on not due to multiple ascensions; that's an assumption based on an unorthodox and unbiblical concept of ascension.

 

[ebia]

It's like one of those attempts that tries to "harmonize" the passion accounts and ends up with Peter denying Jesus 6 or 7 times.

 

[Goinheix]

Ascension isn't just about disappearing though. Ascension is about enthronement. You can have as many disappearing as you want, but only one ascension.

No. scencion is ascencion. When Jesus or somebody ascend to Heaven not necesarely is entroned. Not even Jesus Christ. Eventually, after his last ascencion before Penthecost, Jesus Christ was entroned. Bt there is not any problem on Jesus ascending and apearing for 40 days.

If Jesus did not ascend in 3 different ocations recorded in the NT...then 2 of them are false tales.

If Jesus did not ascend and apears many times during the 40 days...where he stayed?

 

[Goinheix]

It's like one of those attempts that tries to "harmonize" the passion accounts and ends up with Peter denying Jesus 6 or 7 times.

I did harmonize the passion accounts, and al, the Gospels accounts and did it sussesfully. I know what I am talking about.

 

[Goinheix]

Wrong.

As I said before, the same person who wrote the Gospel according to St. Luke also wrote the Acts of the Apostles. There are therefore not two different accounts but the same one.

This is why the Bible is a dumb and difficult book...people don't know how to read it worth a squat. It is the Book of the Church, not individuals to make it say whatever they want it to.

Furthermore, Ebia is correct in that the Ascension is the Incarnate Son's Enthrownment. There is only one Ascension because there is only one Enthrownment. Jesus appeared off and on not due to multiple ascensions; that's an assumption based on an unorthodox and unbiblical concept of ascension.

The ending of Mark is not sure. For this discussion I will keeptit out.

The ascencion in Luke 24 happens in Bethany (v.50)
The ascencion in Acts 1 happens is Jerusalem (v.4) in the Olive Mont (v.12)

I understand that in a forced reading the ascencion at Luke can be interpreted as "after". "After" can be few minutes, one day or a life time. But Luke seems to be saying right after, not sometimes in the far future.

Any how...where was (stayed) Jesus between resurrection and the ascencion after 40 days?