in white apparel; which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."*

Immediately succeeding this latter account, is the following statement concerning the disciples after they had witnessed the mysterious disappearance: "Then returned they unto Jerusalem, from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath-day's journey." It has been inferred from this that the ascension took place from the Mount of Olives, or Mount Olivet, as it is often termed. But in the Gospel of Luke it is represented that Jesus arose from Bethany: "he led them out as far as to Bethany; and......he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven." This seeming discrepancy is, however, sought to be reconciled by a consideration of the fact, asserted by learned geographers, that although the village of Bethany lay beyond the Mount of Olives, on the way to Jericho, yet the tract or district bearing that name (and including the territory of the village) commenced on the eastern declivity of said Mount. It is, therefore, deemed fairly supposable that Jesus went up from the outskirt of Bethany, near the boundary-line, perhaps on the side of the Mount. This method of removing the apparent difficulty in this case, was devised by Dr. LIGHTFOOT.‡

*Acts, i. 9-11. + Ibid, 12.

His writings were originally published in London, in 1684, in two volumes, and entitled "The works of the reverend and learned John Lightfoot, D. D., late Master of Katherine Hall, in Cambridge."

You will please observe particularly, that according to this supposition (which is the only one that harmonizes the seemingly discordant statements in Luke's Gospel and in Acts) Christ ascended not from the summit of the Mount, but from its side,-probably some way down.

Dr. Adam Clarke informs us that "some men of considerable learning and ingenuity" have entertained the opinion that Jesus "did not ascend to heaven; that his being taken up, signifies his going into some mountain, the top of which was covered with clouds or thick vapors, and that the two men in white garments were two priests or Levites, who simply informed the disciples of his revisiting them again at some future time." The Doctor himself, however, scouts this interpretation. He styles it "a miserable comment"; and says of certain "critics and divines," that they "take a most sinful latitude on subjects of this kind." He also says, "One would suppose that an opinion of this kind could hardly ever obtain credit among people professing Christianity." (I suppose it was equally surprising to the Dr. that any one claiming to be a Christian should deny the miraculous conception of Jesus, or the doctrine of the Trinity.) Who the learned and ingenious men were, that adopted the opinion referred to, we are not given to understand. It may be fairly presumed, however, from the last-quoted remark of the Doctor, that (in whatever light he regarded them) they themselves claimed to be, in some sense, * Commentary on New Testament. Remarks on Acts, i. 9.

nominal Christians. Whether the opinion stated be reasonable or absurd those who listen to me are capable of deciding for themselves. I therefore make no attempt to forestall their judgment.

If Jesus really ascended, bodily, into the air, what became of him? Whither did he finally go? It is said that "he went up."* How far up? We are told that he was "carried up into heaven." Mark says he "was received up into heaven, and sat on the right hand of God." Where is the "heaven" to which he arose? In what direction did he probably go to reach it? "Up” is a very indefinite term, except as used relatively. The point of space so called by the Chinese, on the other side of the globe, we should call down. As the earth is spherical in shape and is continually rolling over, it would be impossible to tell whither Jesus went, even supposing him to have ascended from Mount Olivet in a perpendicularly straight line; unless we could ascertain the day of the week and month, and also the hour of the day at which the ascension took place, so as to calculate the earth's exact relative position at that time! It seems that those who saw him arise from the ground where he had stood, soon lost all view of him, for "a cloud received him out of their sight."§

Is it to be supposed that after he had gone up some distance, his material body was miraculously etherealized, or by a purely natural process dissipated into thin air,

Acts, i. 10. Luke, xxiv. 51. Mark, xvi. 19. § Acts, i. 9.

leaving his spirit to ascend to "heaven"? Or is it probable that he soared away bodily to some other planetary orb? The one nearest to our earth is the Moon, as we term it; and that lies at a distance of no less than two hundred and forty thousand miles. Miracle on miracle must have been performed to enable his body to counteract the influence of the earth's attraction, and to preserve its vitality while beyond the earth's atmosphere which extends but a few miles.

Many have supposed (and I believe the idea is prominently set forth by Mr. Miller and his coadjutors) that Christ will descend upon the earth, at some future time, in the same bodily form in which he is said to have visibly ascended. Are they who adopt this conclusion very much out of the way, if the "two men in white apparel" (who, it is thought by some, were angels,) spoke the truth to the apostles, when they addressed them in the following language? "Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this SAME JESUS which is taken up from you into heaven, SHALL SO COME IN LIKE MANNER as ye have seen him go into heaven."*

This story of the ascension of Jesus is not wholly unparalleled. Two somewhat similar cases, as you very well know, are mentioned in the Old Testament. I refer to the translation of Enoch and Elijah. The exit of the former is recorded with exceeding brevity, in the book * Acts, i. 11.

of Genesis: "Enoch walked with God; and he was not, for God took him."* To this event the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews thus alludes: "By faith Enoch was translated, that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God."t

The ascension of Elijah, as we are told, took place in the following manner. He and Elisha were journeying, on foot; "and it came to pass, as they still went on and talked, that behold, there appeared a chariot of fire, and horses of fire, and parted them both asunder; and Elijah went up by a whirlwind into heaven. And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariot of Israel, and the horsemen thereof! And he saw him no more." This account is far more wonderful than those which Mark and Luke give us of the aerial flight of Jesus. The display must have been more gorgeous and imposing, and therefore we may suppose it required the greater exercise of superhuman power. Moreover, as the account was evidently intended to imply, it was an event more fully attested: for only eleven persons saw Jesus disappear; whereas, in the case of Elijah, "fifty men of the sons of the prophets [of Jericho] went, and stood to view afar off."§

Whatever may be the opinion of others, I feel no hesitation in classing the ascension of Jesus with the stories of the miraculous disappearance of Enoch and Elijah. * Gen. v. 24. † Heb. xi. 5. 2 Kings, ii. 11, 12. § Ibid, 7.