The Ascension and The Kingdom of Heaven (Acts 1:4-11)

Introduction

English Standard Version Chapter 1

4 And while staying with them he ordered them not to depart from Jerusalem, but to wait for the promise of the Father, which, he said, “you heard from me; 5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.”

The Ascension

6 So when they had come together, they asked him, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” 7 He said to them, “It is not for you to know times or seasons that the Father has fixed by his own authority. 8 But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you, and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth.” 9 And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. 10 And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, 11 and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”

Well, in our last time, we focused primarily on the baptism of the Holy Spirit and the great commission, and how the Holy Spirit played an essential role in establishing the church at Pentecost, empowering the disciples and the rest of the church for ministry, at times through signs and wonders, repeatedly through the preaching of the Gospel, convicting men of their sin unto repentance, and drawing men to Christ for the forgiveness of sin, that the baptism of the Holy Spirit was intended to empower their commission to bear witness to Jesus’ death, burial and resurrection. That the baptism of the Holy Spirit was given to empower the church to fulfill the great commission.

Now, what we didn’t spend much time considering was Jesus’ ascension, which is an often neglected doctrine. If you’re at all familiar with the church calendar, the church typically celebrates the ascension 40 days after it celebrates Jesus’ resurrection on Easter, in-step with what Luke says there in Acts 1:3,

English Standard Version Chapter 1

3 He presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during

and then later, there in verses 9-11,

English Standard Version Chapter 1

9 And when he had said these things, as they were looking on, he was lifted up, and a cloud took him out of their sight. 10 And while they were gazing into heaven as he went, behold, two men stood by them in white robes, 11 and said, “Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven? This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way as you saw him go into heaven.”

Now, I think one of the primary reasons the ascension is a frequently neglected doctrine is simply because we don’t recognize its significance, and when we don’t recognize its significance we tend to neglect it. Therefore, one of my goals this morning is to demonstrate the significance of Jesus’ ascension. I want you to see the significance of Jesus’ ascension in light of redemptive history, so that you can better understand and appreciate it’s relevance, particularly here in the Book of Acts. Just as a view from an airplane or satellite can provide us with a better perspective of earth, my hope is that when we survey the redemptive narrative we can obtain a better perspective of the ascension and it’s importance.

Now, there are several aspects of the ascension that we could consider, such as the coming of the Holy Spirit, or as Jesus told his disciples in John 16:7, that “it is to your advantage that I go away, for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you. But if I go, I will send him to you.” We could also look at the significance of how Jesus was returning to his former glory that he had with the Father at the beginning, or as he put it in his high priestly prayer in John 17:5 “… Father, glorify me in your own presence with the glory that I had with you before the world existed.”

The kingdom of God

However, I believe the most effective way to communicate the gravity of the ascension is by considering the biblical theme of the kingdom of heaven, or the kingdom of God. In other words, when we consider this biblical theme, I think we’ll immediately gain a greater understanding and appreciation for Jesus’ ascension, we’ll see just how vital the role of his ascension plays in redemptive history and in our own lives. This is why I’ve titled this sermon, The Ascension and the Kingdom of Heaven.

Jesus’ coronation

Now, you might ask, How does the kingdom of heaven relate to Jesus’ ascension? Well, you see, the primary aspect or characteristic of the ascension is that it’s associated with Jesus’ coronation as king. That after he ascended into heaven Jesus immediately sat down at his Father’s right hand of authority, that Jesus took his throne in heaven. That all authority in heaven and on earth was given to him, that Jesus was crowned as king over all.

Messianic kingdom

Now, this is significant for several reasons, but first, because all throughout the prophetic literature of the OT was the developing theme of a future messianic kingdom. A kingdom that would be ruled by one of David’s descendants, who would sit on his throne. That he would be both David’s son, yet David’s Lord. Which we find stated for us in Psalm 110:1 when King David writes, “Yahweh says to my Lord: “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”” Who’s David talking about? He’s talking about a future messianic king, who would be both David’s descendant, yet David’s Lord, and of whom Yahweh will say to him, “Sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool.”

In fact, Jesus referred to this passage when he spoke to the Pharisees in Matthew 22:41-45, and it left them speechless, because they didn’t understand how this future messianic king could be David’s son, yet also David’s lord, we read in Matthew 22:41,

English Standard Version Chapter 22

41 Now while the Pharisees were gathered together, Jesus asked them a question, 42 saying, “What do you think about the Christ? Whose son is he?” They said to him, “The son of David.” 43 He said to them, “How is it then that David, in the Spirit, calls him Lord, saying,

44  “ ‘The Lord said to my Lord,

“Sit at my right hand,

until I put your enemies under your feet” ’?

45 If then David calls him Lord, how is he his son?” 46 And no one was able to answer him a word, nor from that day did anyone dare to ask him any more questions.

In other words, the king that would sit on David’s throne would not only be his descendant, but would also be David’s lord, that he would be greater than David, and that David was only a type of the king who would come after him.

Now, as time progressed, revelation of this messianic kingdom became increasing clearer. For example, when the prophet Daniel interpreted King Nebuchadnezzar’s dream he wrote this in Daniel 2:44-45,

English Standard Version Chapter 2

44 … the

Then later, in Daniel chapter 7, that kingdom is depicted as being given to one like a son of man, we read this,

English Standard Version Chapter 7

13 “I saw in the night visions,

and behold, with the clouds of heaven

there came one like a son of man,

and he came to the Ancient of Days

and was presented before him.

14  And to him was given dominion

and glory and a kingdom,

that all peoples, nations, and languages

should serve him;

his dominion is an everlasting dominion,

which shall not pass away,

and his kingdom one

that shall not be destroyed.

In other words, when the Messiah came, he would be given dominion and glory and a kingdom, an everlasting dominion and a kingdom that would not be destroyed.

Now, first, this is why Jesus referred to himself as the Son of Man. Why? In order to communicate his messianic identity, by associating himself and his ministry with the son of man described here in Daniel 7:13. Second, this is the clearest depiction we have in the OT of what would take place at Jesus’ ascension and coronation.

Kingdom come

Now, many still believe that this kingdom is yet to come, that it’s still yet in our future, but in order to make that assertion one must do so despite Jesus’ insistence to the contrary, that the kingdom of God has come, and that Jesus is already seated upon his throne in heaven over his messianic kingdom. The Gospel writers frequently wrote like Mark, in Mark 1:14–15, saying that “… Jesus came into Galilee, proclaiming the gospel of God, and saying, “The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.”” Or when Matthew wrote in Matthew 4:17, saying, “From that time Jesus began to preach, saying, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”” Or when Jesus was preparing his disciples for the great commission and told them in Matthew 10:7 “.. proclaim as you go, saying, ‘The kingdom of heaven is at hand.’” Which is also consistent with what Luke points out here in Acts 1:3, that Jesus continued teaching his disciples concerning the kingdom of God even after his resurrection, for 40 days. That “he presented himself alive to them after his suffering by many proofs, appearing to them during forty days and speaking about the kingdom of God.” The kingdom of God is the locus of Jesus’ teaching from start to finish. Which explains why Jesus’ disciples were prompted to ask him in verse 6, “Lord, will you at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” In other words, with all of this talk of the kingdom of God being at hand this must mean that Jesus is going to restore the kingdom to Israel.

Furthermore, and going forward, what we’ll see throughout the Book of Acts is how the Apostles came to understand that they were living in the last days, and that the prophecies written hundreds of years earlier, by the prophets, were being fulfilled in their day. That the messianic kingdom had been established at Pentecost, immediately following Christ’s ascension and enthronement in heaven, that the messianic age had begun when the Holy Spirit came at Pentecost. Which is what I believe the Apostle John was referring to, for instance, in Revelation 20 when he described Christ and the church as reigning for a thousand years, a time when the devil’s power to deceive the nations is curtailed in order that the Gospel of the kingdom might spread throughout the earth, a time that we’re still living in today.

You see, when we recognize that the messianic kingdom has come as a result of the coming of Christ, then the meaning and significance behind Christ’s ascension becomes clear, that the messianic king has ascended his throne in heaven and has been given dominion and glory and a kingdom, a dominion that will never pass away, and a kingdom that will never be destroyed.

Dispensational premillennialism

Now, much of popular eschatology today, in our nation particularly, teaches a very different view. Often referred to by theologians as dispensational premillennialism. Now don’t get tripped up by that theological term. I’ll try to describe it as simply as I can. In fact, many Christians have been influenced by this view without even realizing it. For example, maybe you’ve read some or all of the 16 books of the Left Behind series written by Tim LaHaye.

In short, this view argues that the messianic kingdom was postponed as a result of the Jews rejecting Jesus’ ministry, and that it won’t be until the second coming of Christ that Jesus will fulfill the prophecies of the messianic kingdom to Israel, that God’s promises to the Jews have been postponed, and that they don’t apply to the church today. In other words, they don’t see the church as a fulfillment of those OT prophecies, but as a great parenthesis, or a pause in redemptive history. They refer to the time before Christ’s second coming as the Church age, a time that was hidden from OT prophecy, a mystery. You can kind of think of it like God putting a pause on biblical prophecy, establishing the church, and then when Christ returns, fulfilling his promises to Israel and establishing the messianic kingdom for a thousand years that will look very much like Israel did under the old covenant, with Christ literally sitting on the throne of David. This is why many view the reconstitution of the nation of Israel in the Middle East as a fulfillment of prophecy, and are looking forward to the Temple in Jerusalem being rebuilt and the Temple sacrifices re-instituted. They believe that in order for OT prophecy to be fulfilled that the old covenant system and the nation of Israel must be reconstructed in its entirety.

Prophetic versus historical narrative

One of the reasons they believe the church is not a fulfillment of the messianic prophecies given to Israel is due to their reading of OT prophetic literature, treating it like historical narrative that plainly describes future events. In other words, they mistakenly assume that the fulfillment of those prophecies should be understood using a strict literal reading. Now, on the face of it, this seems admirable, we should take Scripture literally, because taking Scripture literally means taking Scripture seriously, however, reading Scripture literally doesn’t mean we don’t take into consideration a book’s literary genre. As I pointed out at the outset of this series, Luke’s Gospel and his Book of Acts are what we call historical narrative, but prophetic literature is a very different genre from historical narrative, therefore to treat prophetic literature like historical narrative is not taking the text seriously. For example, prophetic literature often includes symbolic imagery, metaphors, visions, and oracles, unlike historical narrative, whereas historical narrative is a straightforward telling of events.

Prophecy and typology

As I pointed out in our last time, we must realize that when the prophets spoke of future events they employed language and imagery from their contemporary circumstances. To put it another way, they described future events using the circumstances of their own time, that is, the temple, the land, a city like Jerusalem, a nation, a kingdom, a king, a throne, and a covenant. In fact, these were the only points of reference they had to describe future realities. The prophets were using their contemporary circumstances to describe a future glory that would be much greater, far greater than the Jews had come to assume, and the scope much larger, beyond the lineage of Abraham and the nation of Israel.

I remember coming to realize this for the first time when I started preaching through the Gospel of Matthew, when Matthew started applying biblical prophecy to Jesus’ life and ministry in ways that I had never considered before. He saw Christ as the typological fulfillment of biblical prophecy and events. Once I discovered this, I realized that the NT writers saw typological fulfillment everywhere. For example, the Apostle Paul described Christ as a second Adam. In other words, Adam was a type of Christ, that just as Adam was the federal head of humanity, so Christ is the federal head of a new humanity, the church. Or when Paul describes Jesus as our Passover lamb in 1 Corinthians 5:7, he’s showing how the Passover lamb under the old covenant was intended to portray Christ. We could spend an entire sermon surveying the Bible’s typology and only scratch the surface.

Typological hermeneutic

You see, when you realize that typology is one of the major literary devices employed by Scripture to teach and to instruct, then redemptive history becomes increasingly instructive and beautiful. For instance, when you realize that the nation of Israel and all of its Mosaic laws under the old covenant were ultimately intended to dramatize the kingdom of heaven and the ministry of Christ under the new covenant, then much of biblical prophecy immediately comes into focus. In other words, the nation of Israel and all of its laws under the old covenant were ultimately intended to foreshadow the greater promise given to Abraham, that Abraham would be heir of the world and the father of a multitude of nations, that this promise would find its final fulfillment in a multitude of people from every tribe, language, and nation who share the faith of Abraham. You see, the end game was never the geo-political nation of Israel constituted under the old covenant, it was a means to an end, the end game was the kingdom of God made up of people from every tribe, tongue, and nation.

You see, when Christ came he established a new covenant, and in doing so he made the old covenant obsolete. This is what Hebrews 8:13 teaches after it quotes a prophecy from the Book of Jeremiah concerning the new covenant and says, “In speaking of a new covenant, he makes the first one obsolete. And what is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to vanish away.” In other words, when the new covenant was cut the old covenant was made obsolete, it was superseded by the new covenant. Just like a marriage covenant, you may make more than one marriage covenant in your lifetime (e.g. if your spouse were to die and you were to remarry), but never more than one marriage covenant at a time. Furthermore, this was made especially evident when Jerusalem and the Temple were destroyed in AD 70 according to Jesus’ prophecy in Matthew 24, all as a result of Israel’s apostasy and the breaking of the old covenant, therefore all of the curses of Deuteronomy 28 come down upon her at the hands of the Roman army.

Israel and the church

Now, one of the hallmarks of dispensationalism is that it makes a hard distinction between Israel and the Church, they see no continuity or relationship between the two groups as it relates to redemptive history. They reject any notion that the church is the fulfillment of the promises made to Israel. And this distinction between Israel and the church has had far reaching influence on popular thinking, which was recently illustrated in an interview that went viral a few weeks ago between Tucker Carlson and Tez Cruz, when Senator Cruz asserted that Genesis teaches that we should bless the nation of Israel, Tucker immediately shot back asking whether the modern state of Israel was synonymous with the nation of Israel under the old covenant.

This resulted in a heated exchange that went viral, and it highlights how our theology shapes our thinking and can even shape our political policy, because if you believe that the modern state of Israel is equivalent to the nation of Israel under the old covenant then you will likely view Genesis 12:1-3 as a warning that should be taken seriously when it tells you that whoever blesses Israel will be blessed, but whoever curses Israel will be cursed.

However, if you view the church as the fulfillment of the promises given to the nation of Israel under the old covenant, and that the old covenant ceased at the coming of the new, then you realize that any attempt to apply Genesis 12:1-3 should be directed at the church who is the eschatological Israel. You see, when the old covenant ceased, its covenant members ceased with it, just as the new covenant created a new covenant people. Now, the new covenant has historically been comprised of those who were formerly members of the old covenant (i.e. much of the early church who were Jewish), but they’re membership was on the basis of the new covenant, not the old.

I would argue that to make such a hard distinction between Israel and the Church, as dispensationalists do, setting the nation of Israel on a different redemptive historical track than the church kicks against the testimony of Scripture. And so I want to give you a few reasons for the continuity between Israel and the Church, and why I believe the church is, in fact, the eschatological Israel of God, or the eschatological people of God, that includes both Jews and Gentiles, and that this was God’s intention all along.

Not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel

First, I want to point out that the Apostle Paul argues repeatedly in his letter to the Romans that not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel. And he begins by developing this point early on in Romans 2:28–29 and says, “For no one is a Jew who is merely one outwardly, nor is circumcision outward and physical. But a Jew is one inwardly, and circumcision is a matter of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter. His praise is not from man but from God.” In other words, being Jewish doesn’t boil down to your ethnicity or whether you’re merely descended from Abraham or not, in fact, not even circumcision is enough, only circumcision of the heart.

Then later in Romans 9:6-8 Paul also writes,

English Standard Version Chapter 9

6 But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel, 7 and not all are children of Abraham because they are his offspring, but “Through Isaac shall your offspring be named.” 8 This means that it is not the children of the flesh who are the children of God, but the children of the promise are counted as offspring.

Now, just before this, Paul was lamenting that many of his brothers, his kinsmen according to the flesh, Israelites, were unbelieving and had rejected Christ, so in verse 6 he says that it’s not as if the word of God has failed. Why? Because not all are children of Abraham simply because they’re his offspring, for not all who are descended from Israel belong to Israel. This is important because this means that salvation has never been based upon ethnicity, so boasting that your father is Abraham is insufficient.

Offspring of Abraham

For example, listen to what Jesus told the Pharisees in John 8:39-40 when they boasted that Abraham was their father,

English Standard Version Chapter 8

Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, 40 but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. 41 You are doing the works your father did.”

and a few verses later he tells them, “You are of your father the devil, and your will is to do your father’s desires.” You see, if they were truly offspring of Abraham they would have done what Abraham did. And what did Abraham do? He was obedient to God.

Then later, in Galatians, Paul makes a similar point. There were those in the church who were demanding that the Gentile Christians submit to circumcision, but reminds them in Galatians 3:7-9,

English Standard Version Chapter 3

7 Know then that it is those of faith who are the sons of Abraham. 8 And the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, “In you shall all the nations be blessed.” 9 So then, those who are of faith are blessed along with Abraham, the man of faith

The point that I’m trying to drive home here is that the church, just as the Jews were, is described as the offspring of Abraham. Why? Because they possessed the faith of Abraham. In other words, there is an inherent unity among the covenant people of God in every age, not fundamentally based upon ethnicity, but based upon a like faith.

The circumcision and the Israel of God

Which is why Paul could write to the church in Philippi, likely made up of mostly Gentiles, and call them the circumcision, a term that would have been historically reserved for the Jews under the old covenant. Or when Paul, at the end of his letter to the Galatians, in Galatians 6:16 calls the church there the Israel of God. You see, this isn’t by mistake, the Apostles saw a continuity between the old and new covenants that its members were both offspring of Abraham if they shared the faith of Abraham.

Gentiles grafted in

Furthermore, in Romans 11 Paul described the Gentiles as wild olive branches having been grafted into the olive tree, and that unbelieving branches had been removed. In other words, the Israel of God, represented by an olive tree had not been replaced or supplanted by the church, but rather other wild olive branches (the Gentiles), had been grafted in. You see, the church is never described as disconnected from Israel and its promises, but rather a fulfillment of those promises. This is why I describe the church as the eschatological Israel, the end game was always the kingdom of God consisting of people from every tribe, tongue, and nation.

Conclusion

Which is why the ascension is so significant, because it signaled the dawning of that kingdom, the kingdom of God on the earth, at first, fundamentally spiritual, invisible to the naked eye, coming not in ways that can be observed, nor will they say, “Look, here it is!” or “There!” (Luke 17:21), but evidenced by those who bear witness to it. You see, it’s our duty to bear witness to the kingdom of God, to bear witness that Jesus is King, that God has raised him from the dead, making it certain to all that God has made him both Lord and Christ. That for all those who repent and believe in him that he will forgive them of their trespasses and sins, reconciling them to God through Christ, that they may have eternal life.

Prayer