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

[james2ko]

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...

Knowing the future does not preclude one from lamenting about the present.

 

[e.r.m.]

Knowing the future does not preclude one from lamenting about the present.

I agree. Jesus didn't particularly didn't like the idea of being crucified. "...take this cup away from me, not my will but yours be done."

 

[Thief]

Did I miss it?.....did that thief go to heaven or not?

And baptism is required?....or not?

 

[james2ko]

Did I miss it?.....did that thief go to heaven or not?

And baptism is required?....or not?

Like everything else in Christianity, depends who you ask. There were some allegorical answers. Firstborner and I take a more literal approach. see pg 7 post 63..

 

[Thief]

Like everything else in Christianity, depends who you ask. There were some allegorical answers. Firstborner and I take a more literal approach. see pg 7 post 63..

Perhaps I also missed the reported incident between the Carpenter and two of his disciples.

The report is made is two gospels.

When they came asking position in the kingdom....He said them....
'...you know not what you ask.....'

They replied they did understand and would be willing and able to be...
'...baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with....
and drink from the same cup I shall drink from...'
Mathew 20...

In all fairness, your copy of text might read differently.
You might want to review King James.

But that conversation did not end well.
'...as for who will sit at my right, and who will sit at my left...
such things are not mine to give...'

If the Carpenter could not grant position in the kingdom...
not even those two positions most readily controlled....
Then what kind of authority is that?!!!!!!

What kind of king cannot say to His followers....
'...sit here at my right hand and serve me....sit here at my left...'

'SUCH THINGS ARE NOT MINE TO GIVE'.

He said so.

And this discussion of baptism is an assurance of heaven?

I think not.

 

[e.r.m.]

Like everything else in Christianity, depends who you ask. There were some allegorical answers. Firstborner and I take a more literal approach. see pg 7 post 63..

As do I.

 

[sojourner]

You can't exegete different gospel accounts simultaneously, which is what's going on here. Each account must be considered on its own merits.

When Jesus asks the question "Why have you forsken...?" he's quoting Psalm 22. It's not a literal question -- it's a comforting move on Jesus' part -- and a theological statement on the part of the gospel writer -- that has nothing to do with Jesus' statement to the thief.

 

[e.r.m.]

Did I miss it?.....did that thief go to heaven or not?

And baptism is required?....or not? (Yes)

I'll share what I have read and you can then read the scripture references. First, what baptism of John and the one commanded by Jesus (in Jesus's name) are different -Acts Hebrews 9:16-18, 28, Romans 6:3-4, indicate that the new covenant started after Jesus Jesus had authority on earth to forgive the thief on the thief on the cross, the parylitic, woman who washed Jesus's feet with her hair, etc (Luke 5:24). But what instructions d behind for salvation after his crucifixion and resurrection?, since Jesus died for our sin Jesus, commanded after he resurrected, belongs to the new covenant. We live after Jes and so are under the new covenant. The purposes which the Bible explicitly assigns for Salvation -Mark 16:16, 1 Peter 3:21 and Forgiveness of our sins -Acts 2:38-9, Acts 22:16 manner which the Bible describes people are saved and sins forgiven after Jesus's sacrifice. It is important to pay attention to what is noted in Mark 16, Romans 10:9, and Acts 2 to believe, repent if our sins, confess with your mouth Jesus is Lord, and be baptized in Jesus's name for the forgive sins. If a baptism is done for a purpose other than what is stated in scripture as shown sbove, that baptism is not according to scripture. Romans 6:3-4 indicates that we "are" baptized into his death and raised to a new life. Baptism is where we come in contact with Jesus's blood give people a menu board on different ways of being saved. God gives us His Bible as we follow, we are assured of salvation. God gives no assurance of salvation outside of example, 'Baptism is an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace.' is n Bible, the ones cited above, are. The greek/aramaic, the language in which the Bible w written always refers to baptism as full body immersion. One last note. We cannot be works we do, feeding the poor, attending to orphans, mentoring a younger person in has good works prepared in advance for you to do after you are saved (Ephesians 2:10 which God includes in being saved is not a work, according to the Bible. The Bible nev baptism as a good work you do after you are saved, but the point in which our sins are forgiven (Acts 2:38).

 

[Thief]

forgive sins.

I went ahead without you...post#85...

And the forgiveness of sin is the same as baptism?...I think not.

 

[e.r.m.]

I went ahead without you...post#85...

And the forgiveness of sin is the same as baptism?...I think not.

Not the same thing, but Acts 2:38 says that what baptism is for.

 

[james2ko]

Perhaps I also missed the reported incident between the Carpenter and two of his disciples. The report is made is two gospels.When they came asking position in the kingdom....He said them....'...you know not what you ask.....'They replied they did understand and would be willing and able to be...'...baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with....and drink from the same cup I shall drink from...'Mathew 20...In all fairness, your copy of text might read differently.You might want to review King James.

It is not good practice to utilize controversial text--especially in isolation-- to establish doctrine. There are clear cut, undeniable passages requiring baptism as a condition of salvation.

But that conversation did not end well. '...as for who will sit at my right, and who will sit at my left...such things are not mine to give...'If the Carpenter could not grant position in the kingdom... not even those two positions most readily controlled.... Then what kind of authority is that?!!!!!! What kind of king cannot say to His followers....'...sit here at my right hand and serve me....sit here at my left...' 'SUCH THINGS ARE NOT MINE TO GIVE'. He said so.And this discussion of baptism is an assurance of heaven? I think not.

Ironically, the answer to your question is in the verse you dispute-- "SUCH THINGS ARE NOT MINE TO GIVE'. The establishment of the kingdom is yet future. Christ will take the throne after His return (Rev 11:15). He obviously cannot distribute positions of authority when He Himself was not yet King, right?

 

[e.r.m.]

I went ahead without you...post#85...

And the forgiveness of sin is the same as baptism?...I think not.

Perhaps I also missed the reported incident between the Carpenter and two of his disciples.

The report is made is two gospels.

When they came asking position in the kingdom....He said them....
'...you know not what you ask.....'

They replied they did understand and would be willing and able to be...
'...baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with....
and drink from the same cup I shall drink from...'
Mathew 20...

In all fairness, your copy of text might read differently.
You might want to review King James.

But that conversation did not end well.
'...as for who will sit at my right, and who will sit at my left...
such things are not mine to give...'

If the Carpenter could not grant position in the kingdom...
not even those two positions most readily controlled....
Then what kind of authority is that?!!!!!!

What kind of king cannot say to His followers....
'...sit here at my right hand and serve me....sit here at my left...'

'SUCH THINGS ARE NOT MINE TO GIVE'.

He said so.

And this discussion of baptism is an assurance of heaven?

I think not.

Well for one, those seats were taken.
(NASB)Matthew 20:23
He said to them, "My cup you shall drink; but to sit on My right and on My left, this is not Mine to give, but it is for those for whom it has been prepared by My Father."

And two, if Jesus otherwise didn't have that authority at this point, he did have it 8 chapters later after his resurrection, at which time he also gave the command for baptism,
(NASB)Matthew 28:18-19
And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. [19] "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,

That, my friend, is assurance.

 

[javajo]

Gotquestions has some useful information. But I'm afraid they completely miss the mark on the subject of baptism. Some time ago I emailed them asking some tough questions about a few of their articles. They never got back to me.

No they don't. Salvation is by grace through faith, not of works. The works follow as a result, not a condition.

So because nothing else is added to those scriptures you jump to the conclusion baptism is not a condition for salvation? Not only is that a fallacy (argument from silence) it is also very poor exegesis. Yes, John does emphasize belief as a condition for salvation. But there are other scriptures that present additional conditions which are to be added to the primary condition of belief. Similar to information from one gospel account complimenting missing information from another. God instructs us we are to use "all" of scripture, as the basis of our beliefs (2 ti 3:16).

Believe and be saved is all that is required. Baptism follows as an act of obedience.

Let's discuss it. Post your favorite one.

There are not only many verses, but whole chapters which discuss it, Like Romans 4.
5But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.Rom. 4
8For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9Not of works, lest any man should boast. Eph. 2
5Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, Titus 3

Those who truly trust Christ will obey Him, He specifically states-- baptism is an absolute condition for salvation.

Again, he was teaching the disciples one, spread the gospel, and two to make disciples. Those who have truly trusted Christ and have been saved by that trust should obey him in baptism as a result, not a condition. Baptism is part of discipleship and evidence to men of one's faith. But some, like the thief, or a deathbed convert, who believed, is saved although they had no time to do works. This is why the thief went to Paradise.

The book of James makes it clear: faith [belief] without works is dead. Jas 2:20

Right. If a man SAY he has faith, but then won't get baptized, we question the faith. Especially in that day when being baptized, which associated you with believers in Christ could mean terrible persecution, if someone would not take that step of obedience they concluded, rightfully, that they hadn't actually placed their complete trust in Christ even if they believed the facts of the death and resurrection were true, they would not rely on Christ alone for salvation and would end up going back under the law to try to stablish their own righteousness.

 

[javajo]

Javajo,
Seriously now, with all due respect, are you just repeating what has been spoken to you for so long?

Nope.

Cause in this post, you quoted just about every bumper sticker cliche that protestants have to offer.

Like what?

Have you personally opened the Bible and studied out specifically and deeply what the Bible says about works (including, but not limited to Romans 3:28)?

Absolutely.

If you have not made a respectable studious effort of understanding the Bible's teaching on works, you are not qualified to preach like you are doing about staining grace by adding a work.

Trust me, I have spent a lifetime.

If you have studied it out, because I cannot assume that you have not, then share those scriptures to justify your stance that baptism is such a work as referenced in Romans 3:28.

Baptism is something WE do, thus making it a work. Its that simple. For salvation, Christ has done the work and sat down at the right hand of the Father. We accept what he has done as a free gift as Romans 5 and Ephesians 2 say.

Add to that, scripture for the over quoted notion that baptism is a believer's first act of obedience. Scripture, not just your opinion. I base my request on your claims.

Look at Acts 16. The Jailer asked what he must do to be saved and they told him to believe on Jesus and he would be saved. The very next thing, after he believed and was saved, is he got Baptized. And that is the pattern throughout the Book. Baptism is always the believer' first act of obedience, as a result, not a condition of salvation.

 

[e.r.m.]

I respect your willingness to step up to the plate, sincerely. I am not a bully, but I mean what I said. Your answers, although appreciated, are deficient.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Cause in this post, you quoted just about every bumper sticker cliche that protestants have to offer.

Like what?

Baptism is a first step of obedience of a believer. It is an act of obedience after we are saved by trusting Christ. Many people trust Christ but die before they are able to be baptized, like a deathbed conversion. And like the thief on the cross.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If you have studied it out, because I cannot assume that you have not, then share those scriptures to justify your stance that baptism is such a work as referenced in Romans 3:28.

Baptism is something WE do, thus making it a work. Its that simple. For salvation, Christ has done the work and sat down at the right hand of the Father. We accept what he has done as a free gift as Romans 5 and Ephesians 2 say.

1. I asked you to share a scripture that baptism is a work as referenced in Romans 3:28, but let’s just say Romans. You shared your opinion and not scripture. In my experience (which of course is not all encompassing) this is what protestants have always done with this question. Something to the effect of “Well, it just is.” Not very convincing.
2. I’ve read the chapters Romans 5 and Ephesians 2 but did not have all of it memorized. I just read them and compared them with your statements: For salvation, Christ has done the work and sat down at the right hand of the Father. We accept what he has done as a free gift…
All praise to Christ for what he has done, of course, no argument there. But neither does Romans 5, nor in Ephesians 2 say or allude to our part being “We accept what he has done as a free gift.” In the most general and descriptive sense, yes of course we accept rather than reject His free gift. But in terms of what Jesus and the apostles instructed us, they did not say nor allude to “you get saved at the point you accept the free gift.” This idea is what I call a logical deduction, conjecture, and a filler in the absence of concrete scripture. There is not recorded in the Bible an instruction or example when someone “accepted the free gift and was saved.” Synonyms don’t count. Believing in Jesus John 3:16 (which is not an exclusive phrase) and “accepting Christ’s free gift to be saved” are distinct concepts.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Add to that, scripture for the over quoted notion that baptism is a believer's first act of obedience. Scripture, not just your opinion. I base my request on your claims.

Look at Acts 16. The Jailer asked what he must do to be saved and they told him to believe on Jesus and he would be saved. The very next thing, after he believed and was saved, is he got Baptized. And that is the pattern throughout the Book. Baptism is always the believer' first act of obedience, as a result, not a condition of salvation.

In this scripture, what can be seen are chronological events:
-Jailer asked, “What must I do to be saved”
-Paul responded “Believe and you will be saved, you and your entire household” – Paul did not say ‘believe only’ or 'just believe'.
-He and his household were baptized.

This scripture does not say they were baptized as an act of obedience - that’s filled in by those who believe in that teaching.

This scripture does not specify at what point they were saved.

This scripture does not say they were baptized for forgiveness of sins.

This text describes what happened ‘only’ and not ‘why’.
Sincerely - Keep trying, but there are no scriptures Book, Chapter(s), and Verse(s) that allude to the purpose of baptism as an act of obedience. You made this claim enthusiastically, you have the burden of furnishing a scripture for this idea. It is wrong to teach this idea without some Biblical foundation.

 

[javajo]

I respect your willingness to step up to the plate, sincerely. I am not a bully, but I mean what I said. Your answers, although appreciated, are deficient. Give me a few minutes to switch from my phone web to a computer. Thank you.

Hi, thanks. Well, I'm not going to write an essay on it. Have you ever read the book, "So Great Salvation" by Ryrie? Its pretty good.

 

[e.r.m.]

Hi, thanks. Well, I'm not going to write an essay on it. Have you ever read the book, "So Great Salvation" by Ryrie? Its pretty good.

I'm sure we will agree on one idea. This is not a competition.
I respect your lifetime of Bible study. I feel disappointed that you wish not to publicly address these concerns (this last post), but hope that you will take the time to consider them on your own time.
Thank you for the book reference, I promise to take a look at it.

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life..." -John 6:68

 

[Shermana]

hey would not rely on Christ alone for salvation and would end up going back under the law to try to stablish their own righteousness.

So when Paul says "Continue to work out your salvation in fear and trembling", it has nothing to do with "stablishing" your own righteousness.

When Christ says "Be perfect", he means "You will automatically be perfect". When he says "Verily your righteousness must exceed the Scribes and Pharisees" he means "Just trust me and I'll make your righteous on your own" and obviously every so-called believer today is teeming with righteousness.

No need to actually get into what "Righteousness" actually means in scriptural terms.

No need to look at all the verses that say you actually have to obey the Law. We can rely on Paul's epistles (including the dubious ones) as cherry picked as we want to trump and negate any inconvenient verse by Jesus or John or James. What's the point in repentance if you don't have to obey the commandments? None apparently.

When Jesus says its better to chop your hand off than use it in a way to cause you to enter the fire, that has nothing at all with "stablishing" your own righteousness, whatsoever. He really meant to say "Do whatever you want, I'm just kidding!"

All the things Yashua says about having to be righteous and restrain from sin and "Work hard to enter the Kingdom", he was just kidding. You just have to believe! Like Parappa, "I gotta believe!"

 

[javajo]

I'm sure we will agree on one idea. This is not a competition.
I respect your lifetime of Bible study. I feel disappointed that you wish not to publicly address these concerns (this last post), but hope that you will take the time to consider them on your own time.
Thank you for the book reference, I promise to take a look at it.

Simon Peter answered Him, "Lord, to whom shall we go? You have the words of eternal life..." -John 6:68

Thank, er.m. I like to discuss a little without so much debate and competition, so that was nice of you to say. I don't mind talking to you at all. Thanks!

 

[e.r.m.]

Thank, er.m. I like to discuss a little without so much debate and competition, so that was nice of you to say. I don't mind talking to you at all. Thanks!

Likewise to your kind phrases and thank you. I add these phrases to make sure it's conveyed. It's difficult for me not to sound overenthusiatic and aggressive in writing sometimes. But in person, I'm as sweet as pie, lol.