(b) Tlie indirect evidence is remarkably strong. Both in the two Gospels which do not record the event and in the Epistles and discourses of Acts as well as in the visions of the Apocalypse it is implied. We thus have reference to the belief in sources for the greater part earlier than the Gospels. St. Matthew represents Christ as fore- telling it (26^^) ; St. John puts similar foreshadow- ings into His mouth (G^^ 13»-33 14=8 16'- "• "■ =«) ; St. Paul and St. Peter habitually assume it as a fact (Ac 2'' 3" 5'i 13»-", Eph 4?-^^ Ph 1=^ 2' S'", Col 3', 1 Th l'» 4"-", 1 Ti 3'8, 1 P 3==) ; St. Stephen declares the same (Ac 7'=- =«). The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews is equally explicit (He 2^ 4'-' 6"- -" 7-" g24 iQi:. 13 \2-), In the Apocalypse manypassages corroborate (Rev 1" 5" 14" lO'""'" 22'). The con- viction of His Ascension fills the mind of the Apostolic age. It is nowliere insisted upon or proved, it is assumed as a fact among the other facts of Christ's life, as consistent with them, and as real. Tliere is no suggestion that it is an idea less historical than the other features described.
4. Modern departures from the traditional vie%v.~ Within recent years the traditional view of the Ascension has been vigorously contested in various interests. From the side of naturalistic theory the
idea of corporeal ascension has been assailed as absurd. Different rationalistic tendencies have scouted the event as delusion (classical representa- tives are Renan in France ; Strauss in Germany ; Baur, Schenkel), or myth, whose growth was natural from the presence of contributory elements in tlie intellectual and religious atmosphere of the age which were not only not inliarraonious with such an idea and event, but even rendered it necessary (cf. Keim, M. Arnold, ' Supernatural Religion,' etc.). Even the necessities of a true spiritual experience have been urged against it by at least one considerable school (viz. that of Ritschl), which has vastly enriched present-day theological movements by a singularly impressive attempt to interpret the Christian facts through analysis of the ethical experience of the Christian per.sonality, since such experience, it is maintained, best grows and is best explained by communion with the Exalted Christ, conceived not as ' reach- ing down within the realm of our earthly ex- perience,' but as 'otherwise than we see Him in the mirror of history' (Herrmann, Communion if the Christian with God, Bks. ii., iii.), — a conception to which the Evangelical record as it .stands is not adequate. In association with those attempts the relevant textual evidence lias been painstakingly sifted and found insufficient (as, e.g., latest by Schmiedel in his Encyc. Bibl. article on ' Resurrec- tion and Ascension Narratives '). The departures from the traditional view here referred to are better dealt with under RESURRECTION. Here we may point merely to two considerations. First, the whole controversy between orthodox and liberal thought as to the miraculous features in the history of Christ's life has entered on a new phase. A separation is being made between the 'Jesus of history ' and the 'Christ of faith' identified by ecclesiastical dogma. It is admitted that wha't we have in the Gospel narratives was written after the identification was practically complete. The 'Jesus of history,' therefore, can be resuscitated only by going behind even the oldest historical sources ; where, the presumption is, it will be found that the miraculous incidents disappear. The various sources whence the ' myth of Christ ' is derivable are inquired into ; the ignorance of the times, tlie manifest |.i(i\iilircs of His biographers, and the natural i.n.l.n' y in Oriental minds to ex- pand fact into falil''. Ill" hypotheses of fraud, or delusion, or visimi, pirviously entertained, are dis- carded and ' the intellectual atmosphere of the age ' substituted. In particular, in the matter of the Ascension emphasis is laid on (a) current Jewish ideas concerning the departure of great men of God ; (i) alleged similar ideas in ethnic religions ; (c) contemporary apotheosis of the Roman emperors ; (d) the natural working of the human mind, vener- ating a great name, to idealize the life and invest its close with marvel — as all contributory to the belief. Such analogies are pressed with ingenuity. It may be rejoined, however, that in reality they are not in point. Prevailing mental conceptions do not seem even to have favoured the acceptance of tlie doctrine, not to speak of having originated it. Tlie narratives give the consistent impression of its novelty. It appears as not native, but alien to the disciples' thouglit. Comparison with the assump- tion of Enoch and of Moses or the translation of Elijah, or with the deification of the Imperial representative, or with the Buddha-legeiul, only serves to demonstrate its striking originality, ft has a character, place, and use that cannot be assigned to these. It is not in the same plane or in the same department of thought. It possesses au inevitableness, a conscious connexion with pre- vious conditions, a naturalness as another and new * C(. Browning, Christmaa Eve, xv.
ASCENSION
ASCENSION
127
aspect of Jesus' life yet continuous witli and neces- sarily complementary to it, which they all alike lack. It lacks their formality, spectacular effect, incoherence with real life. The motives, more- over, which prompted the Senate to give each successive emperor a place among- thi' k'"'^- '"' "'t' Hindu devotee to regard his hero .-i^ ilivmc, :ii.' easy to trace : in the former instaiu'o pulitiiiil ; in the latter, religious indeed, but too niuva fur tlie .Tew, who had no natural tendency to deify — such a tendency has not been proved, it is incompatible with the "exclusive and stubborn monotheism of the race. The belief enshrines in simple and reti- cent phrase the reception by the disciples of a new fact of His Person, which brings new light and adds new mystery, yet for which they had been prepared.