The thief on the cross misconceptions

[DJT_47]

The thief on the cross misconceptions

Post #1
Post Thu Oct 20, 2022 5:10 pm
I continually encounter people trying to justify that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures. You must read and understand Hebrews 9:15-17 which clarifies why the thief on the cross was saved by Jesus without being baptized. Christ was still alive when this occurred meaning it was done while the old testament or covenant was still in effect; the new testament had not yet been established because Christ had not yet died. And since the Lord was still alive no one could possibly be baptized into Christ under NT salvation criteria. Baptism did not become a requirement as part of salvation until the new testament began which was after the death of Christ. Jesus forgave the thief on the cross no different than he forgave others during his earthly ministry, such as the woman caught in the act of adultery as recorded in John 8. Baptism should not even be an issue when discussing the thief on the cross, but unfortunately always is, but in error.

Hebrews 9:15-17

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

 

[mailmandan]

In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and even the robbers who were crucified with him reviled him with the same thing. I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that one of the thieves had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized.

A common argument used in an attempt to "get around" the thief on the cross being saved through faith "apart from water baptism" is, "the thief was not subject to baptism because he died under the old testament mandate before Jesus died.

So let's see, after the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, in Acts 2:38, we read - "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.." and before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus, while still under the old testament mandate, in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, we read - John came baptizing in the wilderness and preaching a "baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."

So in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3, was this baptism of repentance FOR (in order to obtain) the remission of sins or was it or FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) the remission of sins received upon repentance? It would have to be the latter in order to agree with the old testament mandate argument. In Matthew 3:11, we read: I baptize you with water FOR repentance.. Now did John baptize with water "in order to obtain" repentance or FOR (in regards to/on the basis of) repentance? Obviously, the latter.

Whatever baptism is "for" in Acts 2:38, it's "for" in Mark 1:4 and Luke 3:3 - "in regards to" remission of sins received upon repentance. So the water baptism is not necessary for salvation under the old testament mandate, but is necessary for salvation under the new testament mandate argument doesn't hold water.

Under the old testament and the new testament mandate, salvation is through belief/faith "apart from water baptism" (Luke 7:50; 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 11:17-18; 13:39; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5-6; 5:1; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

 

[dev553344]

The common belief is also that the gift of the Holy Spirit replaces water baptism, which is also incorrect. See Acts of the Apostles 10:47-48. If we're alive and have the chance we should obey the commandments and be baptized.

Mark 16:16 shows that baptism is part of belief to be saved.

Matthew 28:18-19 Demonstrates Jesus' command to baptize.

 

[DJT_47]

To mailmandan: Well, you're very wrong.

Mark16:15-16

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Clearly says belief + baptism = salvation

1Peter 3:21

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Acts 22:16

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

And further, Acts 2:47 says the Lord adds you to the church upon baptism. Where else in the scriptures does it say how one gets into the body of Christ which is his church?

There are other scriptures that clearly indicate that by baptism you become part of Christ's body. Romans 6 says you're baptized into his death and likewise raised with him. Also, it's at baptism that we contact the saving blood of Christ because it was shed at his death. 1 Cor 12:13 also says in one spirit we're baptized into one body.

It's very clear that baptism is absolutely essential to salvation. If you're not part of the body of Christ, you're not in his church nor saved. Believe what you like and attempt to twist scripture to agree with your preconceived ideas, but the scriptures don't lie. Baptism IS a requirement of salvation no different than belief and faith, confession of belief, and repentance.

 

[DJT_47]

The common belief is also that the gift of the Holy Spirit replaces water baptism, which is also incorrect. See Acts of the Apostles 10:47-48. If we're alive and have the chance we should obey the commandments and be baptized.

Mark 16:16 shows that baptism is part of belief to be saved.

Matthew 28:18-19 Demonstrates Jesus' command to baptize.

 

[DJT_47]

Just to clarify that we shouldn't obey and be baptized "if we're alive and have the chance", but rather we MUST obey and be baptized, otherwise we're lost. It's not an option.

 

[Reggie Belafonte]

Who says that the thief was not water baptised !
Only fools are assuming that he was not water baptised in fact.
Jesus knew that mans heart, was he a thief because he wanted to be one ? He had the ability to come to call on Jesus !

 

[DJT_47]

If he was baptized it would have been unto John's baptism. He couldn't have been baptized into Christ because Christ was still alive.

 

[Illuminator]

The "Thief on the Cross" controversy to invalidate water baptism is a useless argument. Jesus identified his desire and was baptized by it.

Historically, the Church has taught that the graces of baptism can be received not only through the administration of the sacrament itself (baptism of water) but also through the desire for the sacrament (baptism of desire) or through martyrdom for Christ (baptism of blood).​

Baptism of Desire

 

[DJT_47]

Sorry. That's unscriptural and is actually contrary to scripture.

 

[Charlie24]

Sorry. That's unscriptural a abd us actually contrary to scripture.

If you make water baptism a requirement for salvation, this is your statement of faith.

I am saved by faith in Jesus Christ, in His death, burial, and resurrection + the person who will water baptize me.

You can't be saved without relying on a person for your salvation through water baptism.

What do you see wrong with this? Is it possible you are misunderstanding something?

You can't get around the fact that your salvation is dependent on a person to carry out a ceremony for you to be saved.

 

[dhh712]

Unfortunately, baptism is a sign. The act itself does nothing in the matter of saving. There are tons of people who have been baptised who are not saved. Romans 6 is describing baptism as what the sign signifies; I'm sure just about everyone he was talking to was baptised too. However, that in no way means that it is essential to salvation because only Jesus saves and Jesus alone. He doesn't need a sign to make that happen.

I would not neglect baptism and think it would be foolish for a believer to scoff at baptism and neglect it just because he is under the understanding that it is not essential. That would indeed be going against the commandment of God because He does indeed command us to repent and be *baptised* so it definitely is something He intends for us to take seriously. Because of this rebellion in his heart and not taking the commandment of God as something that must be done, I'm not sure if this person who claims they do believe in God but will not be baptised will be saved. Of course, only God can make that decision; only God knows the heart.

However, in those rare instances where a believer comes to faith minutes before passing and there is no time for a baptism, I would not be worried that they are not saved if they genuinely called out to Jesus. Now if that were true--that he would not be saved--that would negate God's word here and make God a liar: when He says, "All who come to me I will in no way cast out". Therefore, the only necessary thing for us--who are possessed of a conscious sound mind and ability to reason--is to come to Jesus. Baptism should be done in submission to God's word. Most believers can be baptised and to willingly neglect this could mean that this person has not genuinely come to God.

When my friend's wife passed and he was not sure she was a believer; he was at her bedside when she was near death speaking to her of God. After they prayed the sinner's prayer, he did what he could to do a baptism: sprinkle water on her (now since she was a Roman Catholic, I feel that she was already baptised, but this friend's view of Roman Catholics is that they are pagans all of them. I do not share this view. I only have been baptised by a Roman Catholic priest). I think this is a kind of appropriate effort to take when you do have someone who comes to faith at the last minute before their death--I feel it is important that there is some effort at a baptism (he could not get a minister there at that time though he tried; it was during Covid and her death came quickly) and whatever you can do should be done.

 

[dhh712]

If you make water baptism a requirement for salvation, this is your statement of faith.

I am saved by faith in Jesus Christ, in His death, burial, and resurrection + the person who will water baptize me.

You can't be saved without relying on a person for your salvation through water baptism.

What do you see wrong with this? Is it possible you are misunderstanding something?

You can't get around the fact that your salvation is dependent on a person to carry out a ceremony for you to be saved.

The one verse that people who believe in the necessity of baptism that negates that view is when Jesus says: "Any one who comes to me I will in no way cast out". There is absolutely no argument that can stand that anyone can make against that. Please try. Anything you will say about how something else is necessary then makes Jesus a liar. God cannot lie.

Therefore an Absolutely true statement pronounced as though God Himself has said it is this:

"BAPTISM IS NOT ESSENTIAL TO SALVATION"

Anything else someone will say against that makes God a liar. Please do not say God is a liar. That is equating God with Satan and that is a sin that cannot be forgiven.

(And as I said before in my post above this one, God indeed does command us to be baptised. So, those who are *able to* be baptised and ignore this command are indeed at the risk of not being saved because this is a conscious rebellion in he heart. Those who hold onto this rebellion must repent of it. However, as I said it is absolutely not essential. I may as well say this: "Baptism is not essential to salvation"--Jesus. And I can make that statement because Jesus Himself said it here: "Anyone who comes to me I will in no way cast out".

So let us take a walk in logic here as Jesus himself does in discussions with the Pharisees and Sadducees: Should someone who is minutes before death genuinely come to Jesus but there is no time for a baptism. What happens to the state of their soul? You have two choices: A) Saved. B) Not Saved. Should the "Essential Baptism" crowd choose B--Not Saved because that person has not been baptised then: You have absolutely made God a liar because of this verse: "Anyone who comes to me I will in no way cast out". Now, they have genuinely come to Jesus, but Jesus now says "I have to cast you out because you aren't baptised". Well--what just happened now? God lied. Therefore, the only answer that is true is A. That person--because they have come to Jesus--has been saved).

 

[Behold]

Post #1
Post Thu Oct 20, 2022 5:10 pm
I continually encounter people trying to justify that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures

Paul wrote most of the NT epistles, and Church Doctrine.
Paul wrote.."Christ sent me not to water baptize".

Here is how to understand LEGALISM, as it relates to Cross Rejection.

The clearest way to understand Legalism, is that its anything and everything that is added to the Cross of Christ as a FALSE part of Salvation.
In other words... Jesus is your Salvation. His Cross is why God accepts you and keeps you.

Legalism and heretics who preach it, try to add to the Cross their LIST of "you must ALSO DO"..... as if the Cross of Christ isn't ALL that God offers to forgive you and keep you forgiven.

Here is a partial List of LEGALISM, that heretics will try to add to The Cross of Christ, so that the Cross becomes reduced and omitted.

1.) Water Baptism
2.) Commandment Keeping
3.) Enduring to the end...
4.) The Law
5.) "Our Church" is the Only True Church
6.) Confessing Sin
7.) Living in repentance


See those? Those are NOT WHAT SAVES YOU, and a Heretic will try to get you mentally hooked into keeping all that as a part of WHY God accepts you and keeps you.
And if you become caught up in this Legalism, which is a mental stronghold... you have literally left real faith in Christ and are become a LEGALIST, and your faith in Christ is broken.
That is why these people are ON FORUMS... they are trying to destroy your Faith in Christ and replace it with "SELF RIGHTEOUSNESS"..

Self Righteousness, is. trying to make yourself right with God by SELF EFFORT.
This is LEGALISM and this rejects the Cross of Christ.

 

[DJT_47]

Maybe you weren't clear or I misunderstood. What I thought you said was as long as your intent or desire was to be baptized, that was good enough even though you actually weren't. If that's what you meant, you are wrong and contrary to scripture which says nothing about intent or desire, but only action. Good intentions mean nothing. If that's not what you meant, I'm not understanding where you are coming from. The fact of the matter regarding the thief on the cross is that baptism is a non issue and should never come into the discussion regarding his being forgiven and saved by the Lord because baptism wasn't a requirement for salvation while Jesus was alive. It's people that don't understand the distinction between the old covenant and new and when the new became effective. Old covenant = no baptism, non issue. New testament = baptism is required for salvation as well as is belief and faith, confession of belief per Romans 10:9 as was demonstrated by the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, repentance per Acts 2:38, and immersion in water (baptism), in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, also in accordance with Acts 2:38.

 

[dhh712]

Maybe you weren't clear or I misunderstood. What I thought you said was as long as your intent or desire was to be baptized, that was good enough even though you actually weren't. If that's what you meant, you are wrong and contrary to scripture which says nothing about intent or desire, but only action. Good intentions mean nothing. If that's not what you meant, I'm not understanding where you are coming from.

No, the desire is NOT GOOD ENOUGH if that person is *able* to be baptised. If one is able to be baptised, they should submit to the will of God and not hold rebellion in their heart. However if they are UNABLE to be baptised then this has NO WEIGHT on the matter of the state of that person's soul.

Please see my post above how it is ABSOLUTELY THE WORD OF GOD THAT BAPTISM IS NOT ESSENTIAL to salvation.

To say such a thing makes God a liar and He cannot lie.

The thief on the cross argument is definitely a non-issue because just because it doesn't say he has been baptised doesn't mean that he wasn't. We should never take a strong argument from silence. He could have been baptised before he was on the cross, we don't know.

 

[mailmandan]

To mailmandan: Well, you're very wrong.

Mark16:15-16

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Clearly says belief + baptism = salvation

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions nine different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

1Peter 3:21

21The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY the wicked in Noah's day came in contract with the water and they all perished.

Acts 22:16

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

In regards to Acts 22:16, Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes note of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

In Acts 10:43, receiving remission of sins is connected with "believes in Him" and not with baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) In Acts 26:18, forgiveness of sins are connected with "those who are sanctified by faith in Me." In Acts 9, Jesus told Ananias that Paul "is a chosen vessel unto Me" (vs 15), although the apostle had not yet been water baptized. Before Paul was baptized, Christ had already commissioned him to "bear His name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel" (Acts 9:15) and such a commission is not for one who is still lost in their sins. Before Paul’s baptism, Christ had set him aside as one who would "suffer for His name’s sake" (9:16). Can one who is a child of the devil, as all the lost are (Ephesians 2:1-3, John 8:44), really suffer for Christ’s sake? NO.

So, Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

*It's interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was still lost in his sins.

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - WHAT IS TRUTH: Acts 22:16--Baptism Essential for Salvation?

No scripture is to be interpreted in isolation from the totality of scripture. Practically speaking, a singular and obscure verse is to be subservient to to multiple and clear verses, and not vice versa.

CONTINUED..

 

[mailmandan]

And further, Acts 2:47 says the Lord adds you to the church upon baptism. Where else in the scriptures does it say how one gets into the body of Christ which is his church?

Acts 2:47 says - "And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." How are we saved? By grace through faith, not works. (Ephesians 2:8,9) Acts 2:41 - Then those who gladly received his word (through repentance/faith) were (afterwards) baptized; (just as we see in Acts 10:43-47; 15:7-9) and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.

Acts 4:4 - However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand. *What happened to baptism?

Acts 5:14 - And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

There are other scriptures that clearly indicate that by baptism you become part of Christ's body. Romans 6 says you're baptized into his death and likewise raised with him.

In regards to Romans 6:3-4, as Greek scholar AT Robertson explains - Baptism is the public proclamation of one's inward spiritual relation to Christ attained before the baptism. See on "Galatians 3:27" where it is like putting on an outward garment or uniform. Into his death (ei ton qanaton autou). So here "unto his death," "in relation to his death," which relation Paul proceeds to explain by the symbolism of the ordinance.The picture in baptism points two ways, backwards to Christ's death and burial and to our death to sin, forward to Christ's resurrection from the dead and to our new life pledged by the coming out of the watery grave to walk on the other side of the baptismal grave. There is the further picture of our own resurrection from the grave. It is a tragedy that Paul's majestic picture here has been so blurred by controversy that some refuse to see it. It should be said also that a symbol is not the reality, but the picture of the reality.

Romans 6 - Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Also, it's at baptism that we contact the saving blood of Christ because it was shed at his death.

Typical argument made by folks who attend the church of Christ. (Campbellism) "Through His blood" (Colossians 1:14) is a reference, not limited to the fluid as if the blood has saving properties in it's chemistry and we literally contact it in the waters of baptism, but is an expression pointing to the totality of Christ's atoning sacrifice for sin. The word "cross" is used similarly to refer to the whole atoning work of Christ on the cross. (1 Corinthians 1:18; Galatians 6:12,14; Ephesians 2:16)

1 Cor 12:13 also says in one spirit we're baptized into one body.

This is a reference to Spirit baptism and not water baptism. 1 Corinthians 12:13 - For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.

It's very clear that baptism is absolutely essential to salvation. If you're not part of the body of Christ, you're not in his church nor saved. Believe what you like and attempt to twist scripture to agree with your preconceived ideas, but the scriptures don't lie. Baptism IS a requirement of salvation no different than belief and faith, confession of belief, and repentance.

It sounds like you have been throroughly indoctrinated into Campbellism. There are a handful of alleged prooftexts which are often cited to prove that the Bible makes baptism absolutely necessary for salvation, yet after a careful examination of each of these texts in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely required for salvation, although they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts only prove that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.

 

[DJT_47]

To dhh712: you are way off on your thinking and understanding. Baptism is not a sign, it's a requirement. It's not a 'nice to do if and when I have time thing', it's an absolute necessity or you'll be lost. How do you get into the body of Christ which is the Lord's church? By scripture, not by what you think. The scripture is Acts 2:47. Read Acts 2:38-47. After belief, repentance, and baptism, you receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and the Lord adds you to the church. That's what the scripture says. There is no other way your sins are forgiven nor that you become part of the body of Christ.

And there are no examples of last minute salvation out of fear that anyone was saved in the bible. If that were the case, you could throw out much of the NT scriptures that say otherwise. And there is no such thing in the bible as the sinners prayer. That's man made-up non-scriptural nonsense. The scriptures define the one way to come to God when all pertinent scriptures are considered since you can't find a one liner answer, and that's by belief and faith first abd foremost, confession of your belief per Romans 10:9 as exemplified by the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8, repentance as the jews were told to do in Acts 2:38, and baptism, which is immersion in water, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, also per Acts 2:38. If you do this, you'll be saved and added to the body of Christ by the Lord. If you don't do this, you'll be lost. Period.

 

[mailmandan]

Who says that the thief was not water baptised !
Only fools are assuming that he was not water baptised in fact.
Jesus knew that mans heart, was he a thief because he wanted to be one ? He had the ability to come to call on Jesus !

So being crucified as a thief is the fruit of repentance/faith and receiving water baptism? (highly unlikely!) In Matthew 27:39-44, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith, yet moments later, we see that one of the thieves had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved. (Luke 23:40-43) Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized.

Luke 23:39 - Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, "If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us."

40 But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, "Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong." 42 Then he said to Jesus, "Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom." 43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”