Tim, I don’t think this question is relevant to the passage we are discussing. I think it is a strained interpretation to say that when the angels say, “This Jesus, who has been taken up from you into heaven, will come in just the same way as you have watched Him go into heaven” that they mean you saw a human body leave and he will return in a human body–that the “way” is a human body --that interpretation seems, to me, to fly in the face of the text and the rest of Scripture.
You’ve got to make a better case for your position that “the angels are clearly informing them while they’re ‘gazing intently into the sky’ that Jesus will not return the way he had just left” as that seems to contradict the plain text and it is obviously not clear that the angels are saying “that Jesus will return in the same way he came and left” because as you say, “The angels…instead seem to be saying–even though obliguely”–if it were clear you would not be saying “seem to be saying”. Plus the angels really don’t say anything about how Jesus originally came.
It should also be noted that verse 10 simply says “two men in white clothing stood beside them.” It does not say how long they stood there before speaking. You have come to the conclusion that it was immediate–but that is not required.
Perhaps we should also look at verses 9 and 10. Verse 9 ends with a cloud receiving Jesus “out of their sight”. Verse 10 continues “And as they were gazing intently into the sky while He was going” so there seems to be some flexibility to the timing. We need to keep in mind we are not reading a scientific orderly report–that is not the intent of the passage–it seems like your interpretation hinges on it being so–on them gazing as He goes with the two men in white speaking as he goes. Perhaps we should look at the original text and not an english translation–perhaps that would shed some additional light on the passage.
When he does come again–what is he coming to do? How do the passages regarding his second coming and his judging the living and the dead fit i with your interpretation?
Anyway I remain unconvinced by your arguments to date as I am sure you remain unmoved by the objections raised by others to your interpretation. I wish you well.
The peace of Christ,
Mark
First off Mark, I’m not saying my interpretation is exactly more
tenable than any other. But I do think the passage on its own terms–in its local context–has some mysterious phrasing and context. Here below I highlight what these are:
*“And when he had said these things, while they looked on, he was raised up: and a cloud received him out of their sight. And
while they were beholding him going up to heaven, behold two men stood by them in white garments. Who
also said: Ye men of Galilee, why stand you looking up to heaven? This Jesus who is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come, as you have seen him going into heaven.” *
(DRA)
First off, it is clear in the passage that the angels appear
while they’re watching him ascend. Secondly, their statement
“why stand (you) looking up to heaven?” is introduced with the words
“Who also said”. This implies, at least in my grammatical opinion, a non-imperative statement. That is, that statement could very well be made not to be interpreted as the Angels chiding them towards their mission. After all, that last appearance of Jesus–after 3 years of preparation–was doing
just that. Reminding them about their mission one last time. Lastly, my interpretation is the
only interpretation I know that interprets the Angel’s statements* in relation and context* with each other.
I do think the question as to why Jesus–or the Logos–didn’t arrive from the Sky
in the first place is profound. It’s very relevant–in my opinion–to the literally-interpreted eschatology of his arrival
"on clouds" by reframing the discussion back to what Jesus
was essentially about. Why
didn’t Jesus do everything he did as the
phantasm of Gnostic belief? One reason. His
humility. Which in my opinion, is the center of the Christian heart. God, in his sheer love, humility and selflessness, didn’t
take on human form to communicate his Love to us–but
became a human form, and physically suffered and died in expression of his Love for us.
however,- look at " saw Him" “watched Him” that in Acts 1:11 said our lord will come in the same way as they saw him go into heaven. that as they were watching, he was lifted up, our Lord will come in the same way as they saw him go into heaven. that you can not just see half sentence.
Yes I obviously meant Resurrection. But I still can’t see how you can define any essential difference between Resurrection and Reincarnation. Jesus was humanly dead. He wasn’t in a trauma-induced coma slowly and inexorably falling victim to the privations of liquid or food in his tomb. He was clinically dead. You have less than 6 minutes after the heart stops beating until irreversible brain death occurs. This mortal, human being named Jesus was absolutely no more for three whole days. And then he was resurrected. Or reincarnated ; ) Whatever word you’d like to choose. After all, he didn’t exist any longer.