Ascension of Jesus

=== Cosmology ===
The [[Biblical cosmology|cosmology]] of the author of Luke–Acts reflects the beliefs of his age,{{sfn|Dunn|2009|p=148}} which envisioned a three-part cosmos with the heavens above, an Earth centered on Jerusalem in the middle, and the [[underworld]] below.{{sfn|Wright|2002|p=53}}{{sfn|Najman|2014|p=93}} Heaven was separated from the Earth by the [[firmament]], the visible sky, a solid inverted bowl where God's palace sat on pillars in the celestial sea.{{sfn|Pennington|2007|p=41-42}} Humans looking up from Earth saw the floor of Heaven, made of clear blue [[lapis-lazuli]] ({{bibleverse|Exodus|24:9-10|KJV}}), as was God's throne ({{Bibleverse|Ezekiel|1:26|KJV}}).{{sfn|Wright|2002|p=54,56}} According to Dunn, "the typical mind-set and worldview of the time conditioned what was actually seen and how the recording of such seeings was conceptualized,"{{sfn|Dunn|2009|p=148}} and "departure into heaven could only be conceived in terms of 'being taken up ', a literal ascension."{{sfn|Dunn|2009|p=148}} 

In modern times, a literal reading of the ascension-stories has become problematic, due to the differences between the pre-scientific cosmology of the times of Jesus, and the scientific worldview that leaves no place for a Heaven above earth.{{sfn|Seim|2009|p=23}}{{sfn|Farrow|2011|p=16}} Theologian [[James Dunn (theologian)|James Dunn]] describes the Ascension as at best a puzzle and at worst an embarrassment for an age that no longer conceives of a physical Heaven located above the Earth.{{sfn|Seim|2009|p=23}} Similarly, in the words of McGill University's Douglas Farrow, in modern times the ascension is seen less as the climax of the mystery of Christ than as "something of an embarrassment in the age of the telescope and the space probe,"{{sfn|Farrow|2011|p=16}} an "idea [that] conjures up an outdated cosmology."{{sfn|Farrow|2004|p=9}} 

Yet, according to Dunn, a sole focus on this disparity is beside the real importance of Jesus' ascension, namely the resurrection and subsequent exaltation of Jesus.{{sfn|Dunn|2009|p=149}} Farrow notes that, already in the third century, the ascension-story was read by [[Origen]] in a mystical way, as an "ascension of the mind rather than of the body," representing one of two basic ascension theologies.{{sfn|Farrow|2011|p=17}} The real problem is the fact that Jesus is both present and absent,{{sfn|Farrow|2004|p=3, 8}} an ambiguity which points to a "something more" to which the Eucharist gives entry.{{sfn|Farrow|2004|p=3}}{{refn|group=note|According to Farrow, this ambiguity of absence and presence poses central christological and theological questions concerning the identity of the church and its relation to past (death and resurrection) and future (second coming) events,{{sfn|Farrow|2004|p=8-9}} and to the present world, in which it is situated, but from which it is also different, through "its mysterious union with one whose life, though lived ''for'' the world, involves a genuine break with it."{{sfn|Farrow|2004|p=11}}}}