<<   Title  Contents  >>

III Jesus Christ

3. ASCENSION: EXAMPLES OF EXEGESIS

Then the disciples went away again unto their own homes. But Mary stood without at the sepulcher, weeping: and as she wept, she stooped down, and looked into the sepulcher, and seeth two angels inwhite sitting, the one at the head, and the other at the feet, where the body of Jesus had lain. John 20:10-12.

It may well be that when the disciples returned home, they were full of doubt and hesitation. Although John says that they believed, it is evident that their faith was not firm. They had a confused feeling that a miracle had happened; but they went about as it were in a trance, until something better confirmed them in their faith. It is evident that the sight they saw was not enough in itself to produce solid faith. What is more, Christ did not reveal himself to them until they were aroused from the stupidity of the flesh. When they ran to the sepulcher, they did indeed give a praiseworthy evidence of their zeal; still, Christ hid himself from them because their search for him was much too superstitious.

But Mary stood. Now the Evangelist begins to tell the story of how, when Christ testified to his resurrection, he appeared to the women as well as to the disciples. Even though here Mary alone is mentioned, it seems to me probable that the other women were with her. It is not rational to suppose that these other women had fainted out of fear. The writers who take this view try to escape a contradiction in our story which, as I have shown, does not exist.

We need not praise the women because they remained at the sepulcher, while the disciples returned home; for the latter went home comforted and full of joy, whereas the women indulged themselves in stupid and pointless weeping. What kept them at the grave was mere superstition, together with the feelings of the flesh.

And seeth two angels. What wonderful forbearance our Lord shows toward Mary and her companions in putting up with their many faults! He does them no small honor by sending them his angels and then by showing himself to them -- an honor which was denied even to the disciples. Even while the apostles and the women labored with the same disease, the stupidity of the former was the less excusable because they had learned so little from the careful and exact teaching of Christ. Certainly, it was to shame them that Christ chose to show himself first to the women.

It is not certain whether Mary recognized the angel or took him for a man. We know that white garments symbolize heavenly glory. When Christ revealed his majesty to his three disciples on top of the mountain, there he also was clothed in such white garments. Luke says the same thing of the angel who appeared to Cornelius. I do not deny that Mary might have taken the angel for a man, because Eastern peoples often wore white garments. But the garments with which God adorned his angels were peculiar to them; they were marks by which men might see and recognize them. Besides, Matthew compares to lightning the countenance of the angel who spoke to the women. But still, probably the women's wonder worked only fear; they seem to have stood there struck with stupor and beside themselves.

Moreover, when we read that angels appeared in the visible form of men and clothed in garments, we must remember that this was done to offset human weakness. I have no doubt angels were at times clothed with a body; but as to whether these particular two angels merely appeared to have bodies, that is not the main question, and I shall not settle it. For me it is enough that the Lord gave them a human form, so that they might be seen and heard by the women. They were covered with uncommon splendor, so that they might be distinguished from human beings and show forth what is heavenly and from God.

One at the head, and the other at the foot. The fact that Matthew mentions only one angel does not contradict John's story. Both angels did not speak to Mary at once; this was done by the one who was commissioned for it. There is not much to Augustine's allegory that the position of these angels indicates the course of the future preaching of the gospel, from the place where the sun rises to the place where it goes under. In this place, it is more worth-while to notice the auspices under which Christ ushered in the glory of his Kingdom. When the angels honored Christ's grave [with their presence], they exhibited his celestial majesty. But they did so without abolishing the ignominy of the cross.

Jesus saith unto her, Touch me not; for I am not ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God. John 20:17.

This does not seem to agree with the account in Matthew (28:9): for he writes openly that the women embraced the feet of Christ. Now, since Christ allowed himself to be touched by his disciples, why did he forbid Mary? The answer is easy, if we only remember that Jesus did not repel them until they overdid their desire to touch him. When it was a matter of removing doubt, then surely he did not forbid them. But when he saw that they held on to his feet, he calmed their excessive zeal, and corrected it. They clung to his bodily presence, because they knew only an earthly way of enjoying him. The truth is that Jesus did not forbid them to touch him until he saw their stupid and excited desire to keep him here on earth. Let us note therefore the reason he gave for the prohibition:for I am not yet ascended to the Father. By these words, he commanded the women to control themselves until he was received into heavenly glory. Finally, in this way, he pointed out that the purpose of his resurrection was quite different from their fancy about it. He was come to life again not to triumph in the world, but rather to ascend to heaven and to take possession of the Kingdom which had been promised to him; to reign over the church at the right hand of God, by the power of his Spirit. . . .

I ascend unto my Father. With the wordascend, he confirms what I have said before. For certainly he rose from the dead not to linger awhile longer on earth, but so that, having entered the heavenly life, he might draw the faithful to him. In short, with this word the apostle forbids us merely to stop with resurrection. He bids us to go forward until we arrive at the spiritual Kingdom, at heavenly glory, at God himself. Therefore this word,ascend, is very emphatic; Christ stretches out his hand to his own, so that they may seek their happiness nowhere but in heaven. For where our treasure is, there also must our heart be (Matt. 6:21). Now, Christ declares that he is about to ascend on high; therefore, let us also rise with him, if we would not be separated from him. Furthermore, when he adds that he will ascend, he quickly dispels the sadness and anxiety of his disciples because he was to leave them behind. He wants them to know that by his divine power he will always be with them.Ascendindeed implies distant places; but even though Christ is absent bodily, because he is with God, his spiritual power, which works everywhere, shows clearly that he is present with us. Why indeed did he ascend to the Father, except, seated at his right hand, to reign in heaven and on earth? Finally, with this statement Jesus intended to commend the divine power of his reign, so that his bodily absence might not trouble his disciples.

And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the Spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead. Rom. 1:4.

If you prefer, " designated" to be the Son, etc. (definitus). He means that the power of the resurrection, by which he was pronounced the Son of God, was as it were a decree; as in Ps. 2:7,Ihave this day begotten thee. " Begotten" in this verse means actually " made known." Some find in this verse three evidences of the divinity of Christ: his power for working miracles, the witness of the Spirit, and his resurrection from the dead. I prefer to put the three together into one as follows: Christ was designated the Son of God when he rose from the dead, by an open exercise of true heavenly power, which was the power of the Spirit; but the knowledge of this power is sealed in our hearts by the same Spirit. The language of the apostle agrees well with this interpretation. The power with which he was declared, or the power which shone forth in Christ, that is, in his resurrection, was God's own power; and this proves that he was God. The same point becomes clear in another place where Paul confesses that Christ's death revealed him as subject to the infirmity of the flesh, and extols the power of the Spirit in his resurrection (2 Cor. 13:4). But this glorious work cannot be known by us unless the Spirit himself impresses it upon our hearts. The very fact that Paul calls the Spirit the Spirit of holiness, shows that in his mind the same wonderful efficacy of the Spirit revealed in the resurrection of Christ from the dead is to be seen in the witness which individual believers know in their hearts. He means that as the Spirit sanctifies, he shows and ratifies the power which he exercised once before in raising Christ from the dead. The various titles which Scripture gives to the Spirit fortify the present argument. For instance, our Lord calls him the Spirit of truth, because he effects truth in believers (John 14:17).

Besides, the power shown forth in Christ's resurrection was his own as well as God's; as is evident from the sayings:Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up(John 2:19); and,No one takes my life; of myself, etc. (John 10:18). For he did not beg his victory over death (to which he yielded by the infirmity of the flesh) from another, but achieved it by the working of his own Spirit.

Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men. (Now that he ascended, what is it but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth? He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) Eph. 4:8-10.

Because Paul makes this testimony fit his purpose by turning it aside from its original meaning, the wicked accuse him of abusing Scripture. And the Jews go further. They are malicious enough to pervert the natural meaning of this verse, so as to lend color to their calumny that what is said here of God, applies to David and the people of Israel! David, they say, or the people,ascended up on high, when, elated by many victories, they were set high above their enemies. But when one weighs carefully what the psalm as a whole says, it becomes clear that the above words apply only to God. The whole psalm is as it were anepinicion, a song of triumph, which David sings to God, celebrating the victories given him by God. He makes the recital of his own exploits in this psalm an occasion for commemorating God's own wonderful acts in the deliverance of his people. His aim is to open the eyes of the people to God's glorious power and goodness in the Church. And so, among other things, he says,He ascended up on high. When God does not exercise his judgment in an obvious way, the mind of the flesh thinks that he is idle or gone to sleep. So, according to the judgment of men, when the church is oppressed, God himself is brought low. But when he stretches out his arm in vengeance, he is said to arise and ascend to his judgment seat. This way of speaking is common and well known; so the deliverance of the church is called the ascension of God.

When Paul saw that in this psalm David celebrated the triumphs of God with which he wrought salvation in the church, he rightly applied this verse about the ascension of God to the person of Christ. The greatest victory of God took place when Christ, having overcome sin, conquered death, and put Satan to flight, was lifted up to heaven in majesty, that he might reign gloriously over the church. Therefore, there is no reason why anyone should object that Paul's use of this prophecy was contrary to the mind of the psalmist. Since David saw the glory of God in the continuance of the church, it is evident that no ascent of God shall be more victorious and memorable than that which occurred when Christ ascended to the right hand of the Father, to bring to subjection all principalities and dominations, and then to become in eternity the defender and protector of the church.

He led captivity captive. Captivity here is a collective noun for captive enemies. It means simply that the mighty God has overcome his enemies; but this was done more thoroughly in Christ than in any other way. He has overthrown not only the devil, sin, death, and all hell, but also the lust of our flesh, thus by his word making us rebels into an obedient people. On the other hand, he binds his enemies, that is, all the wicked, with chains of iron, and restrains their fury by his power, so that they can do no more than he permits.

The next phrase,and gave gifts to men, is especially difficult. According to the psalmist, God receives gifts. Paul speaks of giving gifts, which seems to be quite the opposite of what the psalmist says. Still, this is not absurd. Paul is not interested in quoting Scripture word for word. All he wants to do is get at the real meaning of the passage he mentions. Certainly God received the gifts David speaks of, not for himself but for his people, A little before, the psalm itself had said that the spoils of war had been divided among the families of Israel. Since God received in order to give, even though Paul altered the wording of the psalm he did not depart from its meaning.

At the same time, I am inclined towards another opinion; namely, that Paul changed the wordreceivedintentionally. When he did this, he intended not to misquote the psalm but to coin an expression of his own which would serve his present purpose. Having quoted a few words from the psalm, with regard to Christ's exaltation, he added thathe gave gifts. He wanted to show that God's ascent in Christ's person was more excellent than his victories in the ancient church [Israel]. What he does is to compare the lesser with the greater; for after all, when a victor gives freely and bountifully to all his men the spoil taken from his vanquished enemies, his glory is greater than if he gathered it up for himself. The view of others who say that Christ gave us what he received from the Father is forced and has nothing to do with this verse. Thus, in my judgment, the most natural explanation of this passage is that, after quoting the psalm briefly, Paul takes the liberty of adding a phrase of his own, because it is suitable for Christ. The point is that the ascension of Christ is more excellent and wonderful than God's glorious deeds as recounted by David.

Now that he ascended. Now the false accusers belabor Paul again, saying, What frivolous and childish argument is this that forces a figure of speech about the manifestation of divine glory, to apply to the real ascension of Christ! Who does not know, they say, that the wordascendedis a metaphor? And why infer that he must have first descended? My answer is this. Paul does not here argue like a logician about what follows necessarily or what we may infer from the words of the prophet. He knew very well that what David said of God's ascension was metaphorical. But still, it cannot be denied that God's exaltation indicates a previous humiliation. Paul has a good reason for inferring the descent from the ascent. And when did God come down lower than he did when Christ emptied himself? If God was ever brought down ingloriously, and then ascended with glory, it was when Christ, from the depths of our condition, was received to the glory of heaven.

In short, here we must not look for a careful and literal interpretation of the psalm. What we have is a mere allusion to the word of the prophet. Paul does the same thing in Rom. 10:6, when he turns a passage from Moses to his own use (Deut. 30:12). If there be any doubt about the rightness and propriety of Paul's application of this passage to the person of Christ, it is removed by the evidence of the psalm itself, which is a song in celebration of his Kingdom; because, for one thing, it contains a distinct prophecy of the calling of the nations.

Into the lower parts of the earth. There is no sense in torturing this phrase to make it mean purgatory, or hell. Paul is speaking simply about our condition in the present life. The argument from the comparativeloweris very weak. What we have here is not a comparison of one part of the earth with another, but of the whole earth with heaven. He means that Christ left his exalted seat and came all the way down into our own deep abyss.

He . . . ascended up above all heavens:that is, beyond the created world. When we say Christ is in heaven, we must not imagine that he is somewhere among the cosmic spheres, counting the stars!Heavenmeans a place far beyond all the spheres, destined for the Son of God after his resurrection. When we speak of it as another place outside the universe, we do so because we must speak of the Kingdom of God using the only language which we have. There are those who claim that no space separates Christ from us, because, they say,above all heavensandascended into heavenamount to the same thing! But they forget that whether he be above heavens or in heaven, he is beyond everything under the sun and stars, beyond all the spheres which surround the earth, beyond the whole machinery of the visible world.

That he might fill all things. Sinceto filloften means to accomplish, we may so understand it in this place. When Christ ascended to heaven, he came into possession of the dominion given him by the Father, to rule and direct all things by his power. I think we might arrive at an even more beautiful conception if we put together two ideas which, contradictory though they seem, are in fact perfectly congruous one with the other. So soon as we hear that Christ is ascended, we fancy that he is far away from us; as he indeed is in his humanity or in the body. But Paul reminds us that although he is absent from us bodily, he nevertheless fills all things by the power of his Spirit. Whenever the right hand of God, which embraces heaven and earth, is revealed, Christ's spiritual presence fills all things with the exercise of his boundless power. And this is so, even though, according to Peter, his body is and remains in heaven (Acts 3:21).

Thus, we see that Paul, by indulging in an apparent contradiction, added not a little to the grace of his exposition. Christ, who was before enclosed in a narrow space, ascended to fill heaven and earth. But, did he not do this before? Yes, I admit, he did it before in his divinity. But, after he took possession of his Kingdom, he began to exercise the power of his Spirit in a new way; and in the same Spirit, he revealed his presence among us. As John says:The Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus was not yet glorified(7:39); and again,It is expedient for you that I go away; for, if I go not away, the Comforter will not come to you(16:7). In short, when he began to sit at the right hand of the Father, he began also to fill all things.

But he, being full of the Holy Ghost, looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the glory of God, and Jesus standing at the right hand of God, and said, Behold, I see the heavens opened and the Son of Man standing at the right hand of God. Acts 7:55-56.

He saw the glory of God. As I said before, Luke means that when Stephen raised his eyes to heaven, immediately Christ appeared to him. But before that he tells us that Stephen was given other than earthly eyes, whose vision enabled him to rise as far as the glory of God. From this we receive the general consolation that God shall be no less with us, provided, leaving the world behind, all our senses seek after him; not that he will appear to us in an external vision as he did to Stephen, but that he will so reveal himself within us as to give us a true knowledge of his presence. And this way of seeing should be enough for us, since, by his grace and power, God not only shows that he is near us, but also proves that he lives in us.

Behold, I see the heavens. God did not intend to have only private dealings with his servant. He wanted to trouble and vex his enemies. For, when Stephen declares openly that he was given this miracle, he offers them a powerful insult. But it may be asked, How were the heavens opened? So far as I am concerned, I judge that nothing was changed as to the nature of the heavens, but that Stephen was given a new sharpness of vision which, overcoming all obstacles, penetrated to the invisible Kingdom of Heaven. For, even if heaven had been torn apart, no human eye could have reached so high as to see it. Therefore, only Stephen saw the glory of God. As to the wicked who stood there, not only was this spectacle hidden from them, but also they were so blinded within themselves as not to perceive the open light of truth. Therefore, he says that the heavens were opened to him, because nothing prevented him from seeing the glory of God. From this it follows that the miracle was wrought not in the sky, but in his eyes. Therefore, we should not dispute about a physical vision, because certainly Christ did not appear to him in a way and order that is natural, but in a new and singular fashion. And, pray tell me, what were the colors of God's glory that they might have affected naturally the eyes of flesh? Therefore in this vision we should consider nothing but what belongs to God. Besides, it is very much worth noting that the glory of God appeared to Stephen not strictly as it was but in so far as a man is capable of seeing it. For the immeasurableness of God's glory cannot be comprehended by the measure of the creature.

<<   Title  Contents  >>