Why wasn't it necessary for the thief on the cross to be baptized?
 

A question came up in class last night. I haven't heard it asked for some time.

Why wasn't it necessary for the thief on the cross to be baptized?

Jesus did not give the intructions to make disciples and to baptize them, till AFTER his death burial and resurection.

Thanks Free. This is such a simple answer. And for someone to have the knowledge of the cross scenario but then not be able to answer this floors me.

And the New Covenant wasn't activated until the death of the testator -Jesus Christ.

Jesus died before the two thieves.

They broke their legs, and not his, because he was already dead.

But were the terms of the covenant set at that point?

What is your answer to Kutless' question, oh mighty and learned one?

I had that one thrown at me a couple of years ago while having this same discussion.

I was like ":eek: :hmmm ..........you're right!"

Because he was saved by faith. ;)

Which is where this fellow student will lead us next class. Thank God for faith!

"He that believeth"

They say that he was saved by faith because baptism and Holy Ghost infilling hadn't been instituted yet, but sacrificing on the altar sure had been instituted and he wasn't required to do that either. And the law was more strict than grace, right? ;)