The Thief on the Cross

[NotforSale]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Jesus can save anybody. Even a man on his deathbed.

Jesus can even save a dead man. Just ask Lazarus.

[Arphaxad]

so what about the person that goes to church for the first time and hears a powerful message and gets moved to go to the altar and decides to turn his life around to Jesus, and dies unexpetedly the next day?

Originally Posted by Apprehended

When he jumped in the water and went under in the name of Jesus, he was absolved of all sin just for having heard the word, from a sorrowful heart because of sin, this ONE act of righteousness that justified him will accrue to him in judgment.

maybe I should clarify-he only heard a repentance message, didn't get baptized yet.

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

There is no greater picture of the grace of God than the thief on the cross. The man, suspended between heaven and earth next to the Savior of the World, cannot do anything but beg for mercy. "Remember me..." were his words to Jesus. Christ's response, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" displays to us succinctly what unmerited favor means.

To argue this scenario any other way is to ignore the power of its truth. Some say, "Well, the thief was under a different dispensation. Water baptism in Jesus Name and the gift of the Holy Ghost was not available to him. Therefore we cannot say that the thief is not a picture of NT salvation". After they broke the legs of the thieves to expedite their death, they found Jesus already dead. Jesus was dead before the thief. Jesus cried out "It is finished". The blood of the New Testament was shed. The thief very well could've been the first man in the door of the New Testament!

The argument that the thief was under the OT covenant fails as well on the basis of the fact the man could not do what the law required. He couldn't go offer animal sacrifices, observe Passover, be circumcised (if not a Jew), follow the Jewish traditions and customs. And if you argue he falls under the OT covenant, you are saying it was easier to get to heaven in the OT than the NT.

A preacher told one time about a man who was on his deathbed and was not ready for heaven. He said he was frustrated because he felt helpless to help that man. Later he said he felt the Lord showed him what he could've done. He said, "The Lord told me 'you could go get a glass of water for that man, because where he's going, there'll be no water there. You could go find that man a baby and show him the face of an infant because where he's going there'll be no babies there. You could smile at that man because where he's going there'll be only weeping and gnashing of teeth.'" He then went on to say, "I don't know why I felt led to tell you that story, brother, but maybe you can use it next Sunday." I got off the phone and thought, "How depressing!" I then said, "Lord, if that man on his deathbed could not utter a prayer of repentance and you couldn't save him in his desperate cry for help, I don't know that you are really that much of a Savior." In the time that preacher got a glass of water, found a baby or smiled, he could've led the man to repentance, and in my opinion, salvation.

But if you don't believe salvation comes by grace through faith, I guess you'd feel hopeless to help a man in his dying moments.

I think the thief on the cross was included in the Bible to show us just how hopeful and powerful the grace of God is. What a gift!

I vote with you, Deacon, for the greater hope and grace of God!!! He changed everything!!

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Apprehended

I just KNEW Two Boards was somewhere lurking in the shadows.

J/K... Really, it's good to have Two Boards around.

Your scripture of the 11th hour worker is a good one to prove my point. The man on his death-bed never entered the field of labor at all. Such a man is in last moments of life from which there is no retrieval of opportunity to be called or chosen, much less to be found faithful.

Jesus, our Savior is not going to look at such a man and say, "Well done thou good and faithful servant, thou has been faithful over a few things...." If a man has not done well, the Savior is not going to lie just for the purpose of sounding sweet. If a man has not been faithful over anything, our Savior is not going to look at him, smile and then tell him a LIE. That is not the real savior, it is only an imaginary savior that soothes and appeases the carnal mind.

Then, we come to understand how that repentance is more than just a change of mind but that it must be brought forth as a way of life...which cannot be done at the last moments of a life...

Act 26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and [then] to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.

Just like the Jews in those days, the imperative nature of bringing forth fruit worthy of repentance is seen here as required by the Gentiles also.

A man in the throes of death cannot repent since his sorrow for sin is from the prospects of being lost forever and not by reason of the horror of sin itself. He is more interested in getting away with living a life of sin by being saved at the last moment than he is sorrowful for the sin itself. This is duress. No confession is valid under compulsion or duress. Such repentance is not from GODLY SORROW.

2Cr 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

Back to my earlier statement: The problem is not with the Savior's ability to save. The problem lies in the scoundrel that wants to get away with one last but ultimate heist.

There are other scriptures that say that each will be rewarded according to there WORKS. The death-bed saint, will be rewarded with salvation, but possibly with less than the life time saint. Just a thought.

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by Falla39

[/B]

Besides, that is not the HOLY LAND, it is the land of the Bible. That's where
it happened. I do not believe the land over there where natural Jerusalem is,
is where our hearts and minds should be focused. It might have started in old
natural Jerusalem, and went to Samaria, etc., but it came to our family in Savoy,
TX in 1933. Old natural Jerusalem did not know (realize) their time, of visita-
tion. How many have neglected their day of visitation in their city. I believe
the gospel has gone around the world, city by city. Many have rejected the
gospel when it came to their city. God called and led our late parents to our
current city in 1950. God planted the church here in 1958 and it has grown
with our small town to a city. The church has continued to grow. For over 52
yrs God has visited this city. Some have joined us but not all. As long as the
church bears fruit, it will no doubt remain.

[B]Luke 19:44 KJV
And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they shall
not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest not the time of
thy visitation.

Falla39

Bump Bump

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

There is no greater picture of the grace of God than the thief on the cross. The man, suspended between heaven and earth next to the Savior of the World, cannot do anything but beg for mercy. "Remember me..." were his words to Jesus. Christ's response, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" displays to us succinctly what unmerited favor means.

To argue this scenario any other way is to ignore the power of its truth. Some say, "Well, the thief was under a different dispensation. Water baptism in Jesus Name and the gift of the Holy Ghost was not available to him. Therefore we cannot say that the thief is not a picture of NT salvation". After they broke the legs of the thieves to expedite their death, they found Jesus already dead. Jesus was dead before the thief. Jesus cried out "It is finished". The blood of the New Testament was shed. The thief very well could've been the first man in the door of the New Testament!

The argument that the thief was under the OT covenant fails as well on the basis of the fact the man could not do what the law required. He couldn't go offer animal sacrifices, observe Passover, be circumcised (if not a Jew), follow the Jewish traditions and customs. And if you argue he falls under the OT covenant, you are saying it was easier to get to heaven in the OT than the NT.

A preacher told one time about a man who was on his deathbed and was not ready for heaven. He said he was frustrated because he felt helpless to help that man. Later he said he felt the Lord showed him what he could've done. He said, "The Lord told me 'you could go get a glass of water for that man, because where he's going, there'll be no water there. You could go find that man a baby and show him the face of an infant because where he's going there'll be no babies there. You could smile at that man because where he's going there'll be only weeping and gnashing of teeth.'" He then went on to say, "I don't know why I felt led to tell you that story, brother, but maybe you can use it next Sunday." I got off the phone and thought, "How depressing!" I then said, "Lord, if that man on his deathbed could not utter a prayer of repentance and you couldn't save him in his desperate cry for help, I don't know that you are really that much of a Savior." In the time that preacher got a glass of water, found a baby or smiled, he could've led the man to repentance, and in my opinion, salvation.

But if you don't believe salvation comes by grace through faith, I guess you'd feel hopeless to help a man in his dying moments.

I think the thief on the cross was included in the Bible to show us just how hopeful and powerful the grace of God is. What a gift!

Nope, still doesn't work -- He was under the OT regardless if Jesus died 1rst.
Jesus might have died first, but they knew nothing of Matthew 28:19.
That command was not yet given. Even so, I would say that it only works after the resurrection. In which, the thief had died before then. Obviously it couldn't have taken affect because he hadn't risen, it would be as though he was still "in the water," as a figure of speech. Buried.

The last part of his purpose ( resurrection ) had not happened yet.

Repentance = Death
Baptism = Burial
Holy Spirit = Resurrection

Comprehend it now?

Aside comment: It WAS easier to go to heaven in the OT than it is now ( NT ).
Now in the NT, if you LUST after a woman it's the same as "doing it."
However, times were harder in the OT, than the NT.

If you really wish for me to address the whole "faith" situation, I can.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Monarchianism

Nope, still doesn't work -- He was under the OT regardless if Jesus died 1rst.
Jesus might have died first, but they knew nothing of Matthew 28:19.
That command was not yet given. Even so, I would say that it only works after the resurrection. In which, the thief had died before then. Obviously it couldn't have taken affect because he hadn't risen, it would be as though he was still "in the water," as a figure of speech. Buried.

The last part of his purpose ( resurrection ) had not happened yet.

Repentance = Death
Baptism = Burial
Holy Spirit = Resurrection

Comprehend it now?

Aside comment: It WAS easier to go to heaven in the OT than it is now ( NT ).
Now in the NT, if you LUST after a woman it's the same as "doing it."
However, times were harder in the OT, than the NT.

If you really wish for me to address the whole "faith" situation, I can.

Maybe Jesus Miraculously transported the cross and the thief who was on it to a waterhole and placed him under and said I baptize you in my name and then he transported him back to being beside him on the cross (almost instantly so no one noticed). Then maybe the thief did speak in tongues even though it wasn't recorded.

Maybe it happened that way? The bible never says it didn't! Can you believe it COULD have happened that way?

[faithit166]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Maybe Jesus Miraculously transported at the speed of light the cross and the thief who was on it to a waterhole and placed him under and said I baptize you in my name and then he transported him back to being beside him on the cross. Then maybe the thief did speak in tongues even though it wasn't recorded.

Maybe it happened that way? The bible never says it didn't!

just shakes her head (smilin)

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by faithit166

just shakes her head (smilin)

Can you believe it could have happened that way?

[faithit166]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Can you believe it could have happened that way?

truly i dont believe it did just sayin