THEOSISJohn Chrysostom
They use a demonstrative word: "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same manner as you saw Him going into heaven." Again, a radiant image! Certain angels, clothed in human form, suddenly stood before them and said, "Men of Galilee."
By saying, "Men of Galilee," they already appeared worthy of trust to the disciples. If this had not been their purpose, why would they have needed to point out to the disciples their own homeland, which they already knew? By their very appearance they drew the disciples to themselves and showed that they were from heaven.
Why does Christ Himself not say this to the disciples, but the angels? He Himself had spoken with them beforehand about all these things. Through the angels He only reminds them of what they had already heard.
The angels did not say, "Him whom you saw taken up," but, "Him whom you saw going into heaven." This was to show that His being taken up is an ascent. Yet it belongs to the flesh to be taken up.
Therefore they say, "who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same manner." He will not be sent, but He "will come." Where, then, is the inferiority of the Son?
"A cloud received Him." This is fitting, because He Himself ascended upon the cloud. Therefore He who ascended is the same as He who descended (Eph 4:10). But observe how one thing is said in accordance with their thoughts, and another according to the dignity of God.
Yet the mind of those who were watching was now also raised up. The Lord granted them no small knowledge of the second coming. The words, "will come in the same manner," mean that He will come with the body. This is what they desired to hear. They also mean that He will again come to judgment in the same manner, upon a cloud.
"Suddenly," it says, "two men stood by them in white garments." Why does it say "men"? Because the angels assumed the complete form of men, so that the disciples would not be afraid.
"And they said, Men of Galilee, why do you stand looking into heaven?" By these words they show kindness, and they do not allow them to expect His return immediately. They speak about what is more important, and pass over what is less important in silence.
They say that He "will come in the same manner," and that He must be expected from heaven. But they are silent about when. In this way they drew the disciples away from that sight and turned them to their words.
The disciples could no longer see Christ. Therefore the angels acted so that they would not think He had not ascended, but would fix their thought on the angels' words. If even before this the disciples said, "Where are You going?" (Jn 13:36), they would have said it much more now.
"Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?" They knew His meekness so well that even after His sufferings they asked Him, "Lord. Will You at this time restore?" True, He had already said to them, "See that you are not troubled, for all these things must come to pass, but the end is not yet" (Mt 24:6). Jerusalem was not yet to be taken captive. But now they ask about the kingdom, not about the end.
After the resurrection, however, He no longer extends His discourse with them at length. They ask because they suppose that they themselves will be in glory if this comes to pass. But He does not declare whether He will establish that kingdom or not. What need had they to know this?
For this reason, being afraid, they no longer said, "What will be the sign of Your coming and of the end of the age?" (Mt 24:3). Instead they said, "Will You restore the kingdom to Israel?" They thought it had already appeared.
Yet He had shown even in parables that it was not near. When they asked Him, He did not answer the question. Instead He said, "You shall receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you." Observe: He did not say that the Spirit would be sent, but that He would "come upon" them, to show His equality in honor.
How then, O fighter against the Spirit, do you dare call Him a creature? "And you shall be witnesses to Me." He made an allusion to the Ascension. Or rather, even now He again reminded them of what they had heard earlier.
It had already been shown that He ascended into heaven. "Clouds and darkness are under His feet" (Ps 96:2; Ps 17:10). This is also what the words mean: "and a cloud received Him," that is, the Master of heaven.
As a royal chariot points to the king, so a royal chariot was sent for Him. This was so the disciples would say nothing sorrowful and would not suffer what Elisha suffered, when he tore his garment as his teacher was taken up.
What then do the angels say? "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same manner." Moreover, it says, "two men stood by them." This was fitting, because "by the mouth of two or three witnesses every word shall be established" (2 Cor 13:1). This is precisely how they speak.
"In white garments," it says. Just as before, at the tomb, the women saw an angel "in shining garments" (Lk 24:4), who announced to them what they were thinking about, so also an angel is witness to Christ's Ascension. Yet the prophets had often foretold this, as they had the Resurrection.
Angels appear everywhere as messengers. They appear at Christ's Nativity, again at the Annunciation to Mary, and also at the Resurrection. So too they appear at the Ascension. And at the second coming the angels will also appear as forerunners.
Since they had said, "This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven," they added, "will come in the same manner," so as not to lead the disciples into perplexity. The disciples were somewhat comforted when they heard that He would come again, that He would come in the same way, and that He would not be inaccessible.
The word "from you" is not placed there without reason. It shows Christ's love for the disciples, their election, and that He will not abandon those whom He has chosen. Thus Christ Himself bore witness to the Resurrection.
After His birth, or rather even before His birth, the most wondrous thing of all was that He raised Himself. "Destroy this temple," He said, "and in three days I will raise it up" (Jn 2:19). But the angels testify to the future coming, saying, "He will come in the same manner."
Therefore, if anyone desires to see Christ, and if anyone grieves that he has not seen Him, let him hear of His future coming and lead a perfect life. Then he will surely see Him and will not be deceived in his hope.
He will come with greater glory, yet also upon a cloud and also with the body. It is far more wondrous to see Him descending from heaven than ascending from the earth. The angels said that He will come. They did not add why He will come.
This confirms the Resurrection. For if He ascended with the body, much more did He rise with the body. Where are those who disbelieve the resurrection? Who are they, tell me? Pagans, or Christians? I do not know. Or rather, I know perfectly well.
They are pagans, who do not believe even in the creation of the creature. It is their work not to admit that God creates anything from nothing, and not to acknowledge that He will raise what has been buried. But they are ashamed not to acknowledge God's power.
Therefore, to avoid being reproached for this, they say, "We say this not for that reason, but because there is no need for the body." Truly it is timely to say, "The fool speaks folly" (Isa 32:6). Are you not ashamed when you deny that God creates from nothing?
If He creates from something already existing, how does He differ from men? But they say, "Whence is evil?" Because you do not know whence evil is, must you introduce another evil into the knowledge of evil?
Here there are two absurdities. The first is that you dare to speak so. If you do not acknowledge that God created existing things from nothing, then still less will you know whence evil is. The second is that, by speaking so, you introduce evil as unbegotten.
Consider how wicked it is to wish to find the source of evil, and then, when you have not found it, to introduce yet another. Seek whence evil is, and do not blaspheme God. But you will say, "How do I blaspheme?" What are you saying?
Do you not blaspheme when you introduce unbegotten evil? Do you not blaspheme when you suppose that it is equal in power to God, has the same strength, and is unbegotten? See what Paul says: "His invisible things, His eternal power and Godhead, are clearly seen from the creation of the world, being understood through the things that are made" (Rom 1:20).
The devil, on the contrary, said that both came from matter, so that we might no longer know God from anything. Tell me, what is more difficult? Is it to make what is evil by nature beautiful, if indeed such a thing exists? I speak according to your opinion.
Nothing evil by nature can be made to cooperate with good. Or is it more difficult to create from nothing? What is easier, speaking of quality? Is it to bring in a quality that does not exist, or to change an existing one into its opposite?
What is easier, to build a house that does not exist, or to rebuild a house that has been destroyed? Obviously, the first. But according to you, this is impossible. Therefore, just as that is impossible, so is the other, namely, to change something into its opposite.
Tell me, what is more difficult: to prepare perfume, or to make mud produce the effects of perfume? Tell me, which of the two is easier? We are subjecting God to our reasonings. Yet it is not we who do this. No, it is you.
Is it easier to form eyes, or to make a blind man see while remaining blind? Is it easier to make him sharper than the sighted, using blindness in order to see and deafness in order to hear? It seems to me that the first is easier.
So tell me, you grant to God what is more difficult, but not what is easier? But why do I speak of this? In their opinion, souls themselves come from the essence of God. Yet see how much impiety and senselessness there is in their teaching.
First, while wishing to show that evil comes from God, they introduce another evil more impious than this. They say that evil is coeternal with God, and that God is not at all older than it. Thus they dare to ascribe so great a privilege even to evil.
Second, they say that evil is also immortal, because what is unbegotten does not perish. Do you see what blasphemy this is? From this it necessarily follows either that nothing came from God, or that there is no God.
Third, by this, as I have already said, they contradict themselves and bring upon themselves still greater wrath from God. Fourth, they ascribe such great power to matter, which cannot exist by itself. Fifth, they say that evil was the cause of God's goodness, and that without it the Good One would not be good.
Sixth, they block for us the paths to the knowledge of God. Seventh, they bring God down into men, plants, and trees. For if our soul is from the essence of God, and in transmigration it passes into gourds, melons, and onions, then the divine essence will also be in gourds.
If we say that the Holy Spirit formed the temple in the Virgin, they laugh. If we say that He dwelt in the spiritual temple, they laugh again. Yet they are not ashamed to bring the divine essence down into gourds, melons, flies, caterpillars, and donkeys, devising a new form of idolatry.
"But," you say, "the onion is not in God, but God is in the onion. Let the onion not be God." Why do you not allow the migration of God into bodies? "It is base," you say. In that case, what you say is still more base.
"No, it is not base." Is that so? At least among us, if it were so, it would truly be base. Do you see this heap of impiety? But why do they not want the body to rise? What will they say? That the body is evil?
Then tell me, how do you know God? Whence do you have knowledge of things that exist? How can a philosopher be a philosopher if the body contributes nothing to him? Damage the senses, and then learn something of what must be known.