^{page 30 note 1} To mention only the most important and some of the most recent: Holzmeister, H., ‘Der Tag der Himmelfahrt des Herrn’, Z. kath. Theol. LV (1931), 44–82;Google ScholarLarranaga, V., S.J., L'Ascension de Notre-Seigneur dans leN. T. (1938) (very fully documented but ratherinquisitorial; the reader has mostly the feeling he is a heretic);Google ScholarBenoit, P., O.P., ‘L'Ascension’, Rev. Bibi. LVI (1949), 161–203;Google ScholarKretschmar, G., ‘Himmelfahrt und Pfingsten’, Z. Kirchengesch. 4 F. IV, 65 (1954/1945), 209–53;Google ScholarMoule, C. F. D., ‘The Ascension’, Exp. Times, LXVIII (1957), 205–9. Where not strictly necessary I do not give all references to well-known dictionaries and commentaries.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 2} Dix, Gr., The Shape of the Liturgy² (1945), 333 f.Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 3} Barn. Ep. 15. 9: …άνέ*bgr;η (on the eighth day?); Arist. Apol. 15. 2: ad coelos ascendisse(εις ούρ άνñλθεν: post tees dies? –ed. E. J. Goodspeed).Google Scholar

^{page 30 note 4} If Adv. Jud. is authentic Tertullian has loc. cit. 13 (P.L. 2. 677A) the same vague expression as Barn, and Arist.: (in) die tertia quae est resurrectio eius glorwsa, de terra in coelos eum recepit. Recepit = έπέλαβεν? These words mean perhaps no more than the belief that Christ in the resurrection was taken up to the Father but at the same time appeared in the Christophanies: a belief not yet developed with dogmatical precision. Comp. Ign. Ad. Smyrn. 3. 3: υετά δέ τέν άνάστασιν συνέφαγεν αέτοίς καί συνέπιεν ώς σαρκικός καίπερ πνευματικς ένώμένος τπατρί This is a real attempt to maintain the mystery.Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 1} Iren. Adv. haer. 2. 49. 2 (ed. Harv.): et discipulis se manfistavit (Acts i. 3) et videntibas eis receptus est in coelum (loc. cit. v. 9).Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 2} Eus. Vita Const. 4.64 (P.G. 20. 1220): καθ έν refers, to my thinking, to μονάδι, immediately preceding; taking it with Πεντ or έορτέ makes no sense: it would mean that the feast of the Ascension was celebrated during the whole of the Pentecoste. Eusebius however, knows the data of Acts i but agrees with the custom of his time to celebrate the Ascension on Whitsunday. Hence his loose chronology. See also his De solemn. pasch. 5 (P.G. 24. 700 c): the number ‘50’ of the Pentecoste is ‘sealed’ by the last monas, the ‘full festive day of the analèpsis of Christ’. This means that the Ascension was celebrated on Whitsunday as in the Itiner. Aeth. (and not as Larrañaga op. cit. 519 thinks on the τεσσαρακοστέ).Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 3} To mention only one of the recent data: the ‘550 days’ in the Ep. Jac. (Cod. Jung; Quispel;, H.-Ch. Puech-G., ‘Los écrits gnostiques du Codex Jung’, Vig. Chr. VIII (1954), 1–51, loc. cit. 8 a. 11).Google Scholar

^{page 31 note 4} ibid.

^{page 31 note 5} Itiner. Aeth. 43 (ed. H. Pétré in: Sourc. chrèt.): from Hodie statim. In the Church ‘Inbomon’ the bishop reads the Ascension lectiones from Luke xxiv. and Acts i. G. Kretschmar, op. cit. 209 f., rightly indicates that the Syrian and Palestinian Church celebrated Ascension on the fiftieth day of the Pentecoste.Google Scholar

^{page 32 note 1} Bauer, W., Gr. Deutsch. Wörterb. ⁵ (1957), I, Lief., s.v. Theol. Wörterb. z. N. T. (G. Kittel) gives 4. 8/9 s.v. very scanty information about this point.Google Scholar

^{page 32 note 2} Cp. also: Aria Joh. 14 (fragm. in: Apocr. Anecd. 5. i, ed. M. Rh.James: δταυ δέ άναληφθ(έ)ανω φυσις; Bonnet reads: ανθρωπου φύσις). H. B. Swete, The Apostles' Creed (1905), 71/2 rightly says: ‘Άνάλ. was capable of mis-interpretation;… An assumption into heaven might mean nothing more than the return of the higher nature of Christ to the Father or the exaltation of His human spirit…’ There fore the Creeds fell unanimously back on the other group of expressions (άναβ., asc. or άνέπξ). This may have been a factor but, the main reason seems to me the ‘ordinary’ signification of the word άνάλ.Google Scholar

^{page 33 note 1} Theol. Worterb. N. T. IV. 9: anal, in Luke ix. 51 means ‘der Tod Jesu, dessen Zeitpunkt im Heilsplan semen festen Platz hat’, referring to the meaning of ονμπληποũσθαι. According to A. Schiatter, Das Evangelium des Lukas (1931), p. 269: έμέπασ τέ άναλέψεως hat paläastinischen Klang, Das Ende des Menschen tritt dadurch ein, dass der Mensch fort- und hinaufgenommen wird… άνάλέψις Ende nach seinem ganzen Verlauf mit Kreuzigung, Tod, Auferstehung und Himmelfahrt.’ See J. Levy, Wörterb. ü. d. Talm.u. Midr. ² (1924), s.v. (to be taken up=to pass away). D. Plooy, The Ascension in the ‘Western’ Textual Tradition (1929) (Meded. Kon. Ak. Wet. afd. Lett. 67, A, 2), p. 12, points to the exegesis of έμ. T. άντ.άναλ in Bede: tempus passionis eius, and refers to Luke ix.31, the ξοδσν, in Jerusalem. The ‘ordinary’ signification explains all, both in the hellenistic and in the Jewish sphere. Cp. on ξοδσς Bauer s.v.Google Scholar

^{page 33 note 2} One of the technical terms in the Greek myths of the ‘Entruckung’: E. Rhode, Psyche ⁹¹⁰ (1925), 2, 374 f. (in the annot. texts with άφανές ρεν., άρπάзω, άφανíзω,).Google Scholar

^{page 33 note 3} These statistics are based on Dial c. Tryph. Typical for the later ecclesiastical aversion from the original terminological variety: Fus. H.E.d 2. 13. 3 corrects Just. Apol. 26. I άνéλενσιν into άνάληφιν. Luke prefers the passive terminology. For the history of the dogma the remark of Von Harnack continues to be important: ‘Sehr wahrscheinlich ist es auch, dass die Annahme eines wirklichen ascensus in coelum (mcht einer blossen assumptio) der Auffassung von einem wirklichen ascensus Christi de coelo, also der pneumatischen Christologie, zu Gute gekommen ist und umgekehrt’; Lehrb. d. Dogmengesch. ⁵ (1931), p. 223; see also p. 224, n. jand the ‘Anhang’ pp. 382 f. of Bibi. d. Symb. u. Glaubensreg. d. alten Kirche, ed. A. and L. Hahn (1897): ‘weiter ist zu beachten, dass für die Himxnelfahrt kein fester Terminus in ältester Zeit vorhanden war, wie für die Auferstehung…etc.’Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 1} Fr. Blass, Acta aji., ed. philol. 1895, ad loc. Acts i. 3.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 2} The data in Strck-Bilerbeck, Komm. z. N. T. ad loc.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 3} Lagrange, M.-J., Le Livre des Juges (1903), XLIII.Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 4} ibid.); Lukas verwendet geographische Angaben im Dienste seiner sachlichen Konzeption und modifiziert seine Vorlagen stark (18)’; 175 f. about the Ascension: the author rejects on flimsy grounds Luke xxiv. 50–3 (e.g. the ‘unlukanische Lokalisierung in Bethanien’: but Luke writes έως πρός!).

^{page 34 note 5} E.g. Schlatter, A., op. cit. p. 149 f.: ‘Im Tempel beginnt die Geschichte, die der Evangelist erzählt… Dem entspricht der letzte Satz des Evangeiums, nach dem die Junger im Tempel auf das Wirken des Christus im Geist warten…’; D. Daube, The X. T. and Rabb. Judaism (1956), p. 234: lsquo;Its (the priestly blessing) introduction here may have something to do with the fact that Luke, at the. close of the Gospel, takes his readers back to the Temple where his story began. He may wish to indicate that, for the believers, the service from now on had a new meaning.’Google Scholar

^{page 34 note 6} Strack-Billerbeck, op. cit. pp. 2, 64 1; A. Schiatter, op. cii. 459; D. Daube, op. cit. p. 231.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 1} Theol. Wörterb. N.T. 11, 756, n. ii.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 2} In the service of the temple were many proskunèseis: J. Levy, op. cit. I, pp. 498, s.v.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 3} Cp. Matt. xxviii. 8, 17. Ph. H. Menoud, ‘Remarques sur les textes de l'ascension dans LucActes’, Neutest. Stud. R. Bultmann (1954) (Z. N. W. Beih. 21), pp. 148–56 remarks p. 152: ‘L'expression de la fin du verset 50: έπάρας… (κ.τ.λ.) n'a pas de parallèle dans le N.T. ni chez les Pères apostoliques. Nulle part ailleurs Jésus n'accomplit pour ses disciples ce geste qui rappelle la bénédiction que donnéle pretre juif et qui annonce la bénédiction donnée lors du culte de l'Eglise. Il semble donc bien que le verset 50 b soit rédigé dans le style liturgique du second siècle et ne soit pas lucanien. Au verset 52, 1 a χαρά μεράλη qui anime lea disciples, n'est motivée par rien: Jésus vient de leur ètre enlevé’. Menoud does not take into account the conscious Jewish colouring of the whole Gospel and the first part of Acts. He neglects completely the Jewish background.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 4} Cp. the verdict of R. Bultmann, Die Gesch. d. syn. Trad. ² (1931), 310; ‘Ebenso ist Lk. 24. 50–53, der Abschied Jesu, em literarisches Produkt, das Lk. schon vergefunden haben mag. Die Himmelfahrt wird bei den Synoptikern noch nicht in einer Legende erzählt.’ This is rather a disdainful judgement without any explanation.Google Scholar See my article: Het program van Bultmann, R. en de ‘Hemelvaart in het N.T.: uitdaging en antwoord’, Kerk en theologie, VIII (1957), 145–66, cap. pp. 150/1.Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 5} Strack-Billerbeck, op. cit. pp. 2, 55 f. (p. 76: m. Tamid 7. 2 about the incense-offering and the blessing thereafter).Google Scholar

^{page 35 note 6} Ibid. 2. 77/8.

^{page 36 note 1} A still useful and interesting history of the criticism of Luke xxiv. 50–3 in: E. Nestle, Einfuhrung in das Griech. N T. ⁵ (1909), 249–52 (except for a short remark unfortunately omitted in the 4th ed. by E. von Dobschütz (1923), p. 138).Google Scholar

^{page 36 note 2} Jeremias, J., Die Abendmahlsworte Jesu ² (1949), 74/5 pleads for the long recension of our text: ‘V. 50 und 52 f. erfolgt die Schilderung in zweigliedrigen Sätzen, die gleiche Struktur ist auch für 51 zu erwarten.’ W. Michaelis, Die Erscheinwzgen des Auferstandenen (1944), says p. 89: ‘ein zweigliedriger Satz in 24. 51 wäre (anders als in 24. 50 und 52 f.) durchaus unproportioniert.’ V. i b is, however, in its conciseness and shortness most impressive. See about the variations in the style of Luke: R. Morgenthaler, Die lukanieche Geschichtsschreibwzg als Zezgnis (1948), 1, pp. 67 and passim (an uncritical book in many respects but with many useful statistics).Google Scholar

^{page 36 note 3} Brun, L., Die Auferstehung Chthti in der urchr. Ueberlieferung (1925), p. 90.Google Scholar

^{page 36 note 4} Liddell-Scott⁹ (1940), s.v.: bring, carry up, etc. The realistic signification, e.g. in Dan. vi. 23 (24) καì άνηνέχθη Δαν. έχτοū λάκκου. Liddeill.Scott: ά. τινά εις Ολνμπ., ες θεούς (Xen., Plut.). Bauer⁵, s.v.: άνεφέπετελς τόν ούπ. (Romulus: Plut.). It may have been possible that Luke chose άναφ. because of its being in the LXX the technical term for offering: e.g. 3 Reg. 12. 27 άναφέπειν θνσιαν έν οικχ etc. This hypothesis seems to me too speculative to propose it in my text. But the reference seems worth mentioning in the annotations.Google Scholar

^{page 36 note 5} Stauffer, E., Die Theologie des N.T. ⁴ (1948), 5.Google Scholar

^{page 37 note 1} Stauffer, E., op. cit. pp. 117 f. distinguishes: doxological, antagonistical and soteriological forms of interpretations; very useful distinctions.Google Scholar

^{page 37 note 2} As M. Dibelius said: ‘Er (Lukas) muss den Richtungssinn des Geschehens herausarbeiten. Und er hat das getan’ (‘Der erste christi. Historiker’ (1948), Aufs. z. Apostelgesch. (1953), p. 113).Google Scholar

^{page 37 note 3} We cannot deal here with the question of the chronology in Luke xxiv: does Luke suggest it all happened on one day? The spaces of time are clearly present in John and Paul (John xx. 26; xxi. i and 14; I Cor. XV. 1–8).Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 1} Blass, Cp. Fr., op. cit. ad bc.: su.scepit et abduxit. E. Haenchen, Die Apostelgesch. (1956) (Komm. Meyer), p. 119 with W. Bauer, s.v.: ‘in έπολ. liegt hier das Moment des Verbergens und des Trennens, was beides durch άπό ausgedrückt werden kann.’ There is not a word in vv. 9 and 10 about ‘hiding’: the words point only in the direction of a visible separation in actu.Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 2} Theol. Wdrterb. N. T. IV, 906/7. Paul uses the same image a long time before Luke: I Thess. iv. 17.Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 3} Cp. Asc. Jes.Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 4} Grotius, H., Annotationes in N. T. ad loc. Cp. the well-staged assumption into heaven of Apollonius (Philostr. Vita Ap. 8. 30); and the ascension of Peregrinus (Luc. Dc morte Peregr. 39; 40). It is the difference between the chaste historian and the fantastic mythologist. or caricaturist.Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 5} Ατενλзω: fourteen in the N.T.; two Paul, twelve in Luke; ten in tht Acts.Google Scholar

^{page 38 note 6} Πορ. is a word that for Luke can also indicate: to die, to pass away (Luke xxii. 22, 33).Google Scholar

^{page 39 note 1} Strack-Bilerbeck, op. cit. II, 594. In m.Sabb. i. 4:, just as in Acts i. 13: ελσ τό ύπερον άνέβέσαν.Google Scholar

^{page 40 note 1} In The Beg. of Chr. (1933), pp. 4, ad loe.: ‘can be translated only “at the ompletion of the day of Pentecost”.’ That I. Fr. Blass again gives here a clear remark: ‘…συμπλ. inf. praes.: corn in eo esset Ut complerentur, i.e. brevi ante diem pent.… Itaque brevi ante diem pent. haec facta sunt, non ipso die.…'Εν τc. inf. maxime apud Lc. est pro gen. abs.…(italics of Bl.).’ C. F. D. Moule, An Idiom Book of N. T. Greek (1953), p.8 sees in Acts ii., in ονμπλ. ‘an interesting instance of the blurring of the Aktionsart.’ I cannot see that: the inf praes. (impf.) is a mood and tense, deliberately used, to indicate the process of fulfilment. The durative inf. praes. after έν τis as a rule used by Luke to indicate time (e.g. Luke i. 8; Acts ix. 3; cp. Blass-Debr.⁷ §404). Beg. of Chr., loc. cit., maintains over against Ropes.rightly the difference between impf. and aor. in the texts of Luke; but Ropes rightly finds here a Septuagintalist semitism. It is unidiomatical Greek caused by the style that Luke deliberately chose for his Gospel and the beginning of Acts. Moule, loc. cit. refers himself to ‘Moulton-Mulligan’ where, s.v. συνπλ. interesting texts are given (cp. M.-M. p. 210). If Luke had said: δτε συνεπληποūτο ή ήμέρα ρς πεντ. all would have been clear a prima vista; for, cp. Luke viii. 23: συνεπληροūντο meaning: ‘they were being swamped’ (Moffatt)— the process was going on to the fulfilment, but not yet finished; the same as in Test. Sot. (ccl. Ch. Ch. McCown), 22 7: ‘Jerusalem was built, but ò ναòς συνεπληποūτο’ (Sal. is still busy with the building of the temple, the work is nearing completion). Luke chooses deliberately this expression in Acts ii. 1, referring to Luke ix. 51. It seems to me that the whole difficulty arises from not reckoning with the Jewish Pentecost as a whole of fifty days and the distinction of ή ήμεπα as the great day, i.e. the fiftieth day: the period and the distinction taken together. Cp. Beg. of Chr., loc. cit.: ‘but in any case he was thinking of the weeks and their culmination in the feast.’ If there is a ‘blurring’ here, then it is caused by the composition ‘ή ήμ. (sing.) τ. π.’ as an indication that the great feast-day was near at hand. Moreover, as is said above, the whole expression is a deliberately used figure of speech reminding us of the famous words at the beginning of the ‘Reisebericht’ (Luke ix. 51): the days of the death and the resurrection of Christ are now past, the great day of the Pentecost will bring the great day of the Spirit; and the history of the Church begins.Google Scholar

^{page 40 note 2} E.g.: Tob. ii. I.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 1} In Theol. Wörterb. N.T. VI, 50, n. 38.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 2} See G. Kretschmar, op. cit.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 3} To mention only the latest literature: Gutberlet, H., Die Himmelfahrt Chthti in der bildenden Kunst (1934), pp. 63 f. (diss. Münster);Google Scholarde Loos-Dietz, E. P., Vroeg-christeljke ivoren (1947), pp. 106 f. (diss. Leiden);Google ScholarKretschmar, G., op. cit. pp. 218 f. In this München-ivory, for our exegesis it is important that in religious art all sorts of admittedly different incidents are often brought together in a single collective scene without any intention of denying their historical separateness (as here the resurrections and the ascension). I should also like to remind the reader of the absence of modern chapter and verse divisions in the old texts. That is the reason why, e.g. Epiph. Pan. haer. 2. 2. ig could say: Καì εύθύς έν τύπεπέπλήσθησαν πνεύματος άριου, έν τέκ το) άνακάμψαι Αύτούς άπò τοδρους τν 'Ελαιν…; and why Mary, in the different works of art, is pictured as standing amidst the apostles when the Spirit was poured out. When reading Acts ii. i f. the reader did not forget that Mary was among the inner circle of Acts i. 14.Google Scholar

^{page 41 note 4} Moule, C. F. D. in Exp. Times, LXVIII (1957), 208.Google Scholar

^{page 42 note 1} There are more relations; e.g. ύΨωθεις in Acts ii. 33; cp. ύΨ. in John (see C. H. Dodd, The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel (1953), PP. 247; 306/7: ύΨοσωαι syn. for άναβαíνειν).Google Scholar

^{page 42 note 2} My interest in these texts was roused not by the criticism of the annus eeclesiae, but by the programme of the ‘Entmythologisierung’ of R. Bultmann. The Dutch article mentioned above in n. 4, p. 35, was an attempt to give the significance of exegesis for this much debated continental question. R. Bultmann asks for answers to his challenge on the exegetical level. The Ascension texts being the most critical texts in the Gospel and Acts, I chose these texts as test cases. In my opinion they are most illuminating for the insight into the difference between the writing of history and the creation of a myth or a legend.Google Scholar