The thief on the cross: The rule or the exception?

[waitasec]

First of all Christ was not resurrected that same day, he was in the grave.

who said he was?

So was the thief. Secondly there were some resurrected with Christ, though we are not at all certain who it was. Thirdly the "Today" is pinned to the "with him in Paradise". The scriptures speak of Paradise as being the place of the "tree of life" i.e. eternal life. Jesus speaks to us saying in places that if we "abide in him" we "have eternal life". Does that mean we will not pass through death? Not at all. So you see the "today" was actually speaking of his hope of the resurrection to eternal life ( "paradise"), and his abiding in Christ( "with him in"). So what was granted him that day was a promise, not necessarily the realization of it. The realization could have occurred at the time of Christ's resurrection with the other saints, or may await the last day.

i am amazed at how far certain people are willing to go....

 

[e.r.m.]

i wonder how god reveals himself to the illiterate

Although I don't think that applies to anyone on this forum, good question. I will think about that. No immediate answer.

They can have someone read the Bible to them and if they can afford it, they can get the Bible on tape.

 

[james2ko]

First of all Christ was not resurrected that same day, he was in the grave. So was the thief. Secondly there were some resurrected with Christ, though we are not at all certain who it was. Thirdly the "Today" is pinned to the "with him in Paradise". The scriptures speak of Paradise as being the place of the "tree of life" i.e. eternal life. Jesus speaks to us saying in places that if we "abide in him" we "have eternal life". Does that mean we will not pass through death? Not at all. So you see the "today" was actually speaking of his hope of the resurrection to eternal life ( "paradise"), and his abiding in Christ( "with him in"). So what was granted him that day was a promise, not necessarily the realization of it. The realization could have occurred at the time of Christ's resurrection with the other saints, or may await the last day.

I was eventually leading to a similar conclusion. Although, I'm not convinced the text supports the thief coming up in the first resurrection. It would contradict every thing Jesus and the Apostles taught about salvation--- that it would be difficult (Matt 7:14); full of trials, hardship, and tribulation (Acts 14:22). Those in the first resurrection would have been tried and tested in this life and have to endure and overcome (Matt 10:22); before given the awesome responsibility of possessing a powerful, eternal, spirit body to assist Christ in governing the nations, during the millenium (Rev 2:26; 20:6).

There is no way the few words uttered by the thief, moments before his death, would satisfy these criteria. Now for him to be resurrected, after the millennium, (last day) when the effect of obeying God's laws would have transformed the earth to a beautiful "paradise," then be given a period of time (Isa 65:20) to be tested and proven, with Christ and the saints assisting him along the way (Isa 30:19-21), would render Christ's reply to the thief more inline with biblical teaching.

 

[Shermana]

who said he was?

i am amazed at how far certain people are willing to go....

All it says is that Jesus was dead 3 days. The idea that he was in hell is in the dubious 2 Peter I believe. He could have been in paradise those 3 days while his body was in the earth.

 

[waitasec]

All it says is that Jesus was dead 3 days. The idea that he was in hell is in the dubious 2 Peter I believe. He could have been in paradise those 3 days while his body was in the earth.

i just don't get the concept that he died....if he was god incarnate.
and no one mentions the event in mark...where jesus seems to not know what is happening all while this thief in question was hurling insults at him along with the others...
i guess in order to manipulate something, one needs to hand pick what the crop has to offer

 

[InChrist]

i just don't get the concept that he died....if he was god incarnate.
and no one mentions the event in mark...where jesus seems to not know what is happening all while this thief in question was hurling insults at him along with the others...
i guess in order to manipulate something, one needs to hand pick what the crop has to offer

He died because His purpose in coming to earth was to go to the cross to pay for the sins of the world. The event is not specifically mentioned in Mark because as with any eyewitness accounts different people notice and report different highlights of any given event. When each account is put together the big picture is seen.

 

[Shermana]

i just don't get the concept that he died....if he was god incarnate.
and no one mentions the event in mark...where jesus seems to not know what is happening all while this thief in question was hurling insults at him along with the others...
i guess in order to manipulate something, one needs to hand pick what the crop has to offer

He wasn't G-d incarnate, simple. Don't buy into the Trinitarian lies and study up on Philo's "Logos Theology". "Wisdom" was the first created personified being.

 

[Firstborner]

I was eventually leading to a similar conclusion. Although, I'm not convinced the text supports the thief coming up in the first resurrection. It would contradict every thing Jesus and the Apostles taught about salvation--- that it would be difficult (Matt 7:14); full of trials, hardship, and tribulation (Acts 14:22). Those in the first resurrection would have been tried and tested in this life and have to endure and overcome (Matt 10:22); before given the awesome responsibility of possessing a powerful, eternal, spirit body to assist Christ in governing the nations, during the millenium (Rev 2:26; 20:6).

There is no way the few words uttered by the thief, moments before his death, would satisfy these criteria. Now for him to be resurrected, after the millennium, (last day) when the effect of obeying God's laws would have transformed the earth to a beautiful "paradise," then be given a period of time (Isa 65:20) to be tested and proven, with Christ and the saints assisting him along the way (Isa 30:19-21), would render Christ's reply to the thief more inline with biblical teaching.

I tend to agree with you that he does not fit the criteria for the first one. Him awaiting the second would in no way take from the promise given him. A small case could be joined that he overcame at the cross, but the main point here I think we are in agreement on is that he was promised that day something, but the conclusion of that promise was not meant for that day.

 

[waitasec]

He died because His purpose in coming to earth was to go to the cross to pay for the sins of the world.

lets just say for the sake of argument that is true...
why then, didn't god in all his perfect knowledge not know his creation would need a savior after the fall?
seems to me god changed his mind 3 times
from the beginning to the flood
from the flood to the temple
from the temple to christ's sacrifice
and every time he changes his mind it has to do with social unrest...

The event is not specifically mentioned in Mark because as with any eyewitness accounts different people notice and report different highlights of any given event. When each account is put together the big picture is seen.

mark specifically mentions those that were being crucified where insulting him, a clear contradiction. also, jesus is pretty sure what is going to happen in luke when he tell the guy that they will be in paradise that day...but in mark he asks god why was forsaken... 2 very different narratives that cannot be reconciled.

 

[waitasec]

All it says is that Jesus was dead 3 days. The idea that he was in hell is in the dubious 2 Peter I believe. He could have been in paradise those 3 days while his body was in the earth.

i'm not buying into anything, my post was purely for the purpose of argument
it takes a lot to convince me of anything...

 

[james2ko]

mark specifically mentions those that were being crucified where insulting him, a clear contradiction. also, jesus is pretty sure what is going to happen in luke when he tell the guy that they will be in paradise that day...but in mark he asks god why was forsaken... 2 very different narratives that cannot be reconciled.

Sure it can. It is certainly plausible that, initially, both thieves insulted Christ, but then one of them had a change of heart. After hearing Christ's words on the cross, under extreme circumstances, and seeing His unbelievably gracious and forgiving attitude, the one thief may have been compelled to acknowledge that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. We do it all the time. How many times have we made a statement about someone or something only to later retract the statement after receiving more information?

 

[waitasec]

Sure it can. It is certainly plausible that, initially, both thieves insulted Christ, but then one of them had a change of heart. After hearing Christ's words on the cross, under extreme circumstances, and seeing His unbelievably gracious and forgiving attitude, the one thief may have been compelled to acknowledge that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. We do it all the time. How many times have we made a statement about someone or something only to later retract the statement after receiving more information?

but then what about jesus calling out to god, why have you forsaken me and then turns around and tells the thief he will be with him in paradise that day...
still doesn't add up.

 

[james2ko]

but then what about jesus calling out to god, why have you forsaken me and then turns around and tells the thief he will be with him in paradise that day...still doesn't add up.

Sure it does...Luke's account indicates Christ's "paradise" comment to the thief was made before His "forsaken" comment:

Luk 23:40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?
Luk 23:41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong."
Luk 23:42 Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom."
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."
Luk 23:44 Now it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

Mat 27:44 Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him with the same thing.
Mat 27:45 Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land.
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"
Mat 27:47 Some of those who stood there, when they heard that, said, "This Man is calling for Elijah!"​

Christ's paradise comment was probably said between Mat 27:44 and 45 which Luke simply omitted.

 

[waitasec]

Sure it does...Luke's account indicates Christ's "paradise" comment to the thief was made before His "forsaken" comment:

Luk 23:40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation?
Luk 23:41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong."
Luk 23:42 Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom."
Luk 23:43 And Jesus said to him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise."
Luk 23:44 Now it was about the sixth hour, and there was darkness over all the earth until the ninth hour.

Mat 27:44 Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him with the same thing.
Mat 27:45 Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land.
Mat 27:46 And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"
Mat 27:47 Some of those who stood there, when they heard that, said, "This Man is calling for Elijah!"​

Christ's paradise comment was probably said between Mat 27:44 and 45 which Luke simply omitted.

even if that were the case the narrative is different though...
in this scene jesus is saying, in essence...i know what is going to happen
then he turns around and asks god why he is being forsaken...

 

[URAVIP2ME]

even if that were the case the narrative is different though...
in this scene jesus is saying, in essence...i know what is going to happen
then he turns around and asks god why he is being forsaken...

Jesus integrity was being tested to the limit.
Forsaken or abandoned being released into the hands of his enemies.
No one could say Jesus was being comforted by God.
At that point there is No protection for Jesus physically or spiritually.
Jesus lays down his life of his own free choice for us.

 

[InChrist]

even if that were the case the narrative is different though...
in this scene jesus is saying, in essence...i know what is going to happen
then he turns around and asks god why he is being forsaken...

Although Jesus knew where He was going there was a time period of excruciating agony where He was forsaken by His Father, who cannot look upon sin, turned His back upon His beloved Son while Jesus bore all the sins of the world.

 

[Shermana]

The idea that G-d "Cannot see sin" is not meant to be literal. If I "cannot listen to left wing politics", that doesn't mean I can't actually listen to it.

[URL="http://niv.scripturetext.com/habakkuk/1.htm"]New International Version

(©1984)
Your eyes are too pure to look on evil; you cannot tolerate wrong. Why then do you tolerate the treacherous? Why are you silent while the wicked swallow up those more righteous than themselves?[/URL]New Living Translation (©2007)
But you are pure and cannot stand the sight of evil. Will you wink at their treachery? Should you be silent while the wicked swallow up people more righteous than they?

 

[waitasec]

Jesus integrity was being tested to the limit.

how is that possible when jesus is the essence of integrity?

Forsaken or abandoned being released into the hands of his enemies.
No one could say Jesus was being comforted by God.

jesus was god incarnate...

At that point there is No protection for Jesus physically or spiritually.
Jesus lays down his life of his own free choice for us.

jesus never died...he was god incarnate supposedly...
he sacrifices himself to himself...he knew the outcome yet he yells why have you forsaken me...
i am willing to concede that this is an account of a disillusioned person...
maybe with a bi-polar disorder or something...i'm sure there were a lot of guys, in fact there were, who had some sort of god complex around the same time in history....

 

[Shermana]

how is that possible when jesus is the essence of integrity?

jesus was god incarnate...

jesus never died...he was god incarnate supposedly...
he sacrifices himself to himself...he knew the outcome yet he yells why have you forsaken me...
i am willing to concede that this is an account of a disillusioned person...
maybe with a bi-polar disorder or something...i'm sure there were a lot of guys, in fact there were, who had some sort of god complex around the same time in history....

Or you could just see it as reasons against the Trinity.

 

[waitasec]

Or you could just see it as reasons against the Trinity.

and open a pandora's box? no thanks