The Thief on the Cross

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Monarchianism

Huh? We are to repent daily, yea? Doesn't the Bible say something about not keeping prayer, that you will be thrown in with the wicked?
( Not in those exact words ) Perhaps it means that you are considered a wicked man. Prayer is an everyday thing. Cannot remember where it talks about it at..

I've never heard of whatever verse you are talking about?

If I sin, I must ask for forgiveness. ( If the sin is huge, it's not a "will you forgive" simple question. If it's huge, you have to basically beg God to forgive you, while you are "rolling in your tears" as a figure of speech. ) I have seen this happen before..

Regardless of how you feel about it you don't have to beg God for forgiveness. You don't even have to get teary eyed over it.

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Regardless of how you feel about it you don't have to beg God for forgiveness. You don't even have to get teary eyed over it.

There are sins that are embarrassing that you should not repeat. Some that you should not speak of, because it should not go through a person's mind.
In order to ask for forgiveness then, without speaking out for anyone to hear what it is, all you can do is cry.

Besides, saying "will you forgive" is just like a dry prayer. Prove you're sorry.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Monarchianism

There are types of sins that are embarrassing that you should not repeat. Some that you should not speak of, because it should not go through a person's mind. In order to ask for forgiveness then, without speaking out for anyone to hear what it is, all you can do is cry.

Besides, saying "will you forgive" is just like a dry prayer. Prove you're sorry.

Stop adding to the list of requirements.

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Stop adding to the list of requirements.

I didn't, only telling what I've seen when it is a "huge" sin. Are you mad?
Small sins are different, yet all are the same. A great sin is doing something over and over.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Monarchianism

I didn't, only telling what I've seen when it is a "huge" sin. Are you mad?
Small sins are different, yet all are the same. A great sin is doing something over and over.

What you have seen is not the only proper way to respond to a huge sin. Are you upset that I am calling you out on this?

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by jfrog

What you have seen is not the only proper way to respond to a huge sin. Are you upset that I am calling you out on this?

Nope.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Maybe the story should be defined first.

Matt 27 and Mark 15 declare that BOTH thieves mocked and made fun of Jesus.

SO answer this: How can one robber be saved in Luke but both robbers mocked Jesus in Matt and Mark?

Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Matt 27:44 The robbers who had been crucified with Him were also insulting Him with the same words.

Should you define what happened before you argue about what it means?

Originally Posted by jfrog

One thief could be saved because even though they both mocked Jesus at first the one thief eventually expressed a small amount of faith.

The disciples of Jesus "stood afar off" (Luke 23:49) from the scene of the crucifixion. That those who were closest to Him physically when He died were "strangers" and "thieves" is one of the most poignant aspects of the death of Jesus Christ. Because of the distance kept by the disciples at the scene, there would no doubt be differing angles on the events surrounding the crucifixion in the early days of the church.

The apparent change of heart by one of the thieves is just one of the details that could have easily escaped the notice of some of the disciples. Minor "discrepancies" like this actually tend to corroborate the truth of the overall accounts.

Police investigators often comment about how their own suspicions are piqued when supposed eyewitnesses give exactly the same account of an event. This would tend to suggest that the "eyewitnesses" had collaborated in concocting their story. Minor differences in reporting details is only natural.

The group of disciples all could have heard the railing of both thieves as reported by Matthew and Mark. Then, later, while some tuned out or may even have turned away, only a part of the group may have heard the very brief conversation between Jesus and the repentant thief.

Interestingly, the apostle John, who seems to have been the only male from the group who ventured up close, doesn't mention any details at all about those who were crucified at the same time as Jesus Christ in his Gospel. He barely even acknowledges their existence as "bodies."

Such a traumatic scene must have had a dramatic - and different - impact upon all of those who witnessed it.

[Praxeas]

Years ago, before there was an FCF, I new an ana-baptist. He believed baptism was essential. However in the situation of someone that could not be baptized or died before being baptized with true faith in his heart (meaning he had the intent to obey), that God would essentially make an exception

Later I ran into a Greek Orthodox man. He told me essentially the same thing, but added that those questions were never asked in the East. The Easterns just never speculated. It was just a forgone conclusion that you were baptized because the bible says so. No questions. No speculations. Yet in the west there is so much speculation.

I note that not once in the bible did anyone quiz the Apostles about baptism; Why? Do I have to? Is it necessary?

Not once did anyone put baptism off for a day or week or so. Not once did they put someone through an extensive bible study first. Not once did anyone refuse baptism.

I noted that baptism was the immediate command and was immediately obeyed.

Had that thief on the cross somehow survived the ordeal and lived, I am sure he would have continued in faith and when he heard the word that the Apostles preached, been baptized in Jesus name like the rest

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Maybe the story should be defined first.

Matt 27 and Mark 15 declare that BOTH thieves mocked and made fun of Jesus.

SO answer this: How can one robber be saved in Luke but both robbers mocked Jesus in Matt and Mark?

Mark 15:32 Let Christ the King of Israel descend now from the cross, that we may see and believe. And they that were crucified with him reviled him.

Matt 27:44 The robbers who had been crucified with Him were also insulting Him with the same words.

Should you define what happened before you argue about what it means?

Both men mocked Jesus. One repented and one did not.

[Falla39]

Originally Posted by NotforSale

Visuals are great for leaving a lasting impression. I had a kidney stone attack one morning, and my wife had to call the ambulance. I was stricken! I was on the floor and couldn't get up.

Anyway, I was rushed to the hospital where they did a Cat Scan and gave me intense pain medication. The doctor, who was a female, came in to tell me, "You've just experienced the worst pain know to man!"

A few days later I passed the stone, and it was about the size of a small grain of sand. They gave me a container to store the stone. I was amazed at the power of something so small.

Well, took the little rock to Church and preached about the power of small things. People were amazed that the worst pain known to a man was caused by something so little!

I went on to tell the Church that it's really the small things in life that matter, the things we don't notice or take for granted.

I noticed that the doctor (female) told you that you had just experienced
the worst pain known to man (not woman)! Can you imagine what a woman
experiences in childbirth. A child is so much larger than a grain of sand.

I'm sure that was a good message though! Also it's the little foxes that spoil
the vine. The power of small things.

Blessings,

Falla39