Does Luke Contradict Himself About the Ascension?

Bart Ehrman says that Luke flat-out contradicts himself regarding the ascension. He believes Luke says Jesus ascends on the day of the resurrection. Acts has Jesus ascending 40 days after the resurrection. So which is it? When we look at the text more closely, we find that there's no contradiction here. Ehrman is just reading the text uncharitably.

Join this channel to get access to perks:

[PeterTheRock-II]

"Let us take a look at the text for ourselves rather than taking his word for it." - Testify

[Mark-cdwf]

The only guy here who “isn’t concerned with historical accuracy” isn’t named Luke.

His name is Bart Ehrman.

[Mike]

Man it seems like Bart Ehrman can just manufacture contradictions and discrepancies out of thin air.

[litigioussociety]

These discrepancies have been explained and rebuked for nearly 2000 years by apologists. It's always absurd when someone thinks they've found a flaw in the Bible that no one else ever claimed or explained before.

[krismikewill]

Luke 24:50, in Greek, is

'εξήγαγεν δὲ αὐτοὺς ἕως πρὸς Βηθανίαν (And he led them as far as/towards Bethany). The preposition πρὸς has the force of "to/toward, " while ἕως, if acting as a preposition, can mean "as far as" or intensify the idea of "towards." The statement does not mean they were located IN Bethany, but movement towards Bethany. FUN FACT: The Mount of Olives is, indeed, on the way to Bethany.

Following the Ascension in verse 51, verse 52 continues:

καὶ αὐτοὶ προσκυνήσαντες αὐτὸν ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ μετὰ χαρᾶς μεγάλης (And having worshipped him they returned to Jerusalem with great/large joy). This is not a problem. They returned to Jerusalem. Acts 1 says this.

Acts does not include the movement to Bethany when mentioning the occurrence of the Ascension itself (explicit in Acts 1:9).

Acts 1:12 in Greek is:

Τότε ὑπέστρεψαν εἰς Ἰερουσαλὴμ ἀπὸ ὄρους τοῦ καλουμένου Ἐλαιῶνος, ὅ ἐστιν ἐγγὺς Ἰερουσαλὴμ σαββάτου ἔχον ὁδόν (Then they returned to Jerusalem away from the mountain called Olivet which is near Jerusalem, a Sabbath's journey).

So, what Ehrman actually does is prey on lay Christians' (lack of) knowledge of Greek and Palestinian geography.

SUMMARY: Luke's Gospel actually says Jesus led them towards Bethany, as far as Bethany, but does not say they were IN Bethany. The Mount of Olives is on the way towards Bethany, and close enough to be considered "part of Bethany" if pressed. The return of the apostles "from the Mount of Olives" rather than Bethany is not a contradiction.

[pJ-ki]

I hate when people just accept what bart erhman says because he is a scholar, thank God for channels Like yours

[dfacedagame]

Bart knows exactly what Luke was doing there.

[rebukeandreprove.]

Good stuff Testify!! Notice Bart saves his contradictions for his internet blogs. He also writes 2 different types of books. One for the internet atheists and another for scholarship. You never see him debating scholars on contradictions. He would be embarrassed.

[BhikPersonal]

Love these videos. God bless you Erik.

[Captain-Cosmo]

Mark 16:19: "So then, after the Lord had spoken to them, He was received up into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of God."
Question: How did Mark know where Jesus sat?

Luke 24:51: "While He blessed them, He was parted from them and carried up into heaven."
Question: Is Luke suggesting that heaven is literally "up"?

Acts 1:9-11: "Now when He had spoken these things, while they watched, He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly toward heaven as He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel, who also said, 'Men of Galilee, why do you stand gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will so come in like manner as you saw Him go into heaven.'"
Question: Clouds reside in earth's troposphere, about 5-10 miles above sea level. Then the stratosphere extends to about 30 miles, followed by mesophere (50 miles), thermosphere (375 miles), and exosphere (6000 miles). Was Jesus just putting on a good show since the disciples didn't know anything about the earth's atmosphere and he thought it would be impressive flying into the clouds? Or was Luke just speaking metaphorically? If he was speaking metaphorically, how do we know the resurrection wasn't a metaphor? For that matter, how do we know Jesus didn't have a twin brother, just like in [caution: spoilers] Christopher Bale in "The Prestige"?

I may not be the smartest guy in the room, but it seems like resurrections from the dead and flying like Superman seem like more significant details than what time dinner was served.

[veridicusmaximus]

Ah yes the ole telescoping - pull out any literary device to escape the obvious. When Luke was written there was no Acts and anyone reading the narrative would not even think he was telescoping. Also, it is obvious that even though it was dark (Monday as the new day begins at sunset) it was still within a 24 hour period that he ascended. It was not dark when they arrived at the town - "it was toward evening."

They went back to Jerusalem and meet the the others when Jesus showed himself again and then led them out to Bethany and ascended. Pretty simple and clear as written. Now there are other issues since this verse (51) is not in some early mss. and thus a scribe added it later. But this then has issues with Acts 1:2 Either way if original or not original it leaves problems with Acts.

[Delgen]

Also remember that the NT also said that Jesus himself will be the stumbling block for some.

[erikhaynes]

Acts1:9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

It would have saved everyone so much confusion if Luke had simply said this instead:
After he led them to Mount Olivet, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

[jenex]

I've known about this supposed to contradiction at first it shakened my faith. But i then decided to reread the gospels especially the death ressurection and ascension.

After reading it closely and exegetical i found out in reality they don't contradict.

That's the thing with Bart he takes the face value details and exaggerates to make it seem like a contradiction. Those who are intellectually lazy to do their own reading of the Bible and fact check would easily believe him.

I see skeptic posting this supposed contradiction of Luke and i just wonder.

It became the final saw for me

[moriartythethird]

This is a pretty massive screw up on Bart's end. Though something tells me there will be no retraction or apology. Pride cements these people.

[northeastchristianapologet]

I love Bart but I've read enough of his books to know that you cannot just trust his interpretation of the scriptures. You have to read them yourself.

[probaskinnyman]

Awesome video! But I would like to ask, in Acts 1, it is said that they returned to Jerusalem from Mount Olivet, wouldn’t that mean that in Acts, the author is trying to say that Jesus ascended at Mount Olivet? Or am I missing something here

[rebelresource]

Telescoping can also be similar to themes that Jews did with the OT: James Kugel calls this "the Bible retold"

[scienceexplains]

The analysis of the Ascension could be called the
exegesis of the exit of the ex-Jesus

[Michael_the_Drunkard]

Could you make response videos to Atheist channels?