Quotes for Ascension Day

Since Dănuţ Mănăstireanu offered a reminder that it is ascension day, and Ken Brown linked to some of my older posts on the subject and offered some thoughts and reflections of his own, I think it will be enough just to share a couple of my favorite quotes from scholars that are particularly relevant today. First, Keith Ward (The Big Questions in Science and Religion p.107):

We now know that, if [Jesus] began ascending two thousand years ago, he would not yet have left the Milky Way (unless he attained warp speed).

And second, from James D. G. Dunn’s article on “Myth” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels (Downers Grove: IVP, 1992) p.568),

To demythologize the ascension is not to deny that Jesus “went to heaven”; it is simply to find a way of expressing this in language which takes it out of the realm of current or future space research.

Ascension day is a perfect day to draw attention to the fact that literalism is not only problematic, but impossible. Even if someone insists on maintaining the literal truth of the claim in Acts that Jesus literally went up into heaven, they cannot maintain the worldview of the first century Christians which provided the context for the affirmation. They knew nothing of light-years, distant galaxies or interstellar space without oxygen. And it is not possible, through some act of either will or faith, to forget absolutely everything that has been learned since then and believe as they did. Even those who willingly choose to disbelieve modern science are making a choice that the first Christians did not have, and thus accept dogmatically what early Christians naively assumed because they knew no better.

There are plenty who continue to claim they are Biblical literalists. But there are no actual Biblical literalists. Because even the precise words of the Bible, taken literally, mean something different today than they did almost 2,000 years ago.

  • Pingback: James F. McGrath

  • Pingback: religionprof

  • mroge

    “There are plenty who continue to claim they are Biblical literalists. But there are no actual Biblical literalists. Because even the precise words of the Bible, taken literally, mean something different today than they did almost 2,000 years ago.”

    You are spot-on on that one. I was raised a “fundie” and I am amazed that I did not see the contradictions. There is a sort of cognitive dissonance that goes on where Christians in many cases reinterpret the bible in light of what we know today to be scientific facts. Of course there is a great deal of conflict about creationism, but by and large most Christians deny that the Bible says that the earth is flat and that heaven was percieved to be an actual physical place above the earth. What is odd about this sort of “logic” is the fact that for most of the history of the Judeo-Christian religions, scriptures were interpreted to say these exact things! Were the scholars who were more familiar with the original languages and the context of these verses wrong? People scoff at the ignorant scientists who said these things and yet within the Christian tradition several centuries past there was no distinction between science and religion. The scientists who believed in a flat earth and a earth-centric universe got this straight from the Bible! It was only those brave scientists who broke with church tradition that changed that.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X