The Myth of the Thief
by Charles Fry
INTRODUCTION
A prominent and widely-published
contemporary preacher has recently said:
"With the exception of the thief on the
cross, Scripture provides us no example of
an unbaptized heaven-bound soul. The
thief, however, is a wonderful exception.
His conversion forces us to trust the work
of Christ and not the work of baptism.
Remarkable, isn't it, that the first one to
accept the invitation of the crucified Christ
has no creed, confirmation, christening or
catechism? He never went to church, gave
an offering, was never baptized. He said
only one prayer."
The interchange between Jesus and the
thief on the cross has been cited repeatedly
for many years as an example of salvation
through faith apart from baptism, as though
it were a precedent for believers in all generations. The preacher mentioned above was
restating a common line of reasoning that
many who deny the necessity of baptism
have presented. However, almost none of
it is true, nor an accurate picture of what
happened, or what it meant.
UNBAPTIZED HEAVEN-BOUND SOULS
The preacher said that "[w]ith the exception
of the thief on the cross, Scripture provides us
no example of an unbaptized heaven-bound
soul." This is not true. Scripture actually
provides multitudes of examples of
"unbaptized heaven-bound" souls. In
Matthew 8:11, Jesus specifically mentions
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in this category.
Hebrews 11 lists a number of people considered faithful to God who lived and died with
the assurance of an eternal home (Hebrews
11:13-16), but without baptism. In other
words, there were many Old Testament
figures who were heaven-bound souls, and
never received baptism or any commandment to be baptized. With that in mind,
consider the case of "the thief on the cross."
TAKING A CLOSER LOOK
TIMING IS EVERYTHING
The account of Jesus and the thief on the
cross is found in Luke 23:39-43. Luke
writes that the thief said to Jesus, "Lord,
remember me when You come into Your
kingdom" (vs. 42). To this Jesus replied,
"Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be
with Me in Paradise" (vs. 43). This has
been construed by many modern interpreters as an example of New Testament
salvation through faith in Christ. However,
among the most basic problems with this
interpretation is the fact that the New
Testament (New Covenant) was not yet
in place when this exchange occurred. It
is after Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection
that He claimed, "All authority has been
given to Me in heaven and on earth," and
commanded His apostles to go, preach, and
baptize (Matthew 28:18-20; Mark 16:15,
16). Christian baptism is into Christ, and
particularly into His death (Romans 6:3).
Baptized believers are added to a church
that wasn't bought and paid for until Christ
died for it (Acts 2:41, 47; 20:28). The thief
on the cross is not, therefore, an exam-
ple-exceptional or otherwise-of New
Testament salvation (which is based on the
death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus). The
thief's experience reveals nothing about the
need for baptism under the New Covenant,
a covenant ratified by the blood of Christ
(Hebrews 12:24; 10:29).
The contemporary preacher has said that
the thief accepted the "invitation of the
crucified Christ." But that invitation was
proclaimed for the first time seven weeks
later on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2),
including the command to "Repent and...be
baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts
2:38)-not at all by Jesus on the cross.
MYTHS WITHIN THE MYTH
The aforementioned preacher referred to
the thief's "conversion," but what conversion did the thief experience? There is no
suggestion he entered into a new covenant
relationship with God, or that he became
anything new. Forgiveness is not what
we usually mean by conversion. John's
baptism was a baptism of repentance for
the forgiveness of sins (Mark 1:4). But
those baptized by John were Jews bound by
the Law of Moses before and after baptism.
Was the thief bound by any sort of creed
or belief system or code of conduct? Yes.
Before he was sentenced to death, he was
bound by the Covenant of Abraham and
the Law of Moses, and he still was until
he died. Forgiveness didn't change that.
True, "[h]e never went to church," but who
did? That body did not exist until the events of Acts 2.
Did he truly say "only one prayer?" How
could we know about his prayers before
or after his conversation with Jesus? And
his conversation with Jesus can hardly be
construed as an example of a saving prayer,
certainly not in any way that we ordinarily
define prayer as communication with God.
Jesus was physically there with him. The
thief was hearing Jesus speak, observing
His behavior. They spoke to each other.
Such conversations are not ordinarily
described as prayer. Why should this
conversation be described that way, unless
there is a desire to believe in an "exception"
that doesn't exist?
"...TO THE LOST SHEEP OF THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL"
During His ministry, Jesus said, "I was not
sent except to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel" (Matthew 15:24). His ministry was
to the children of Abraham, the Jewish
people. Two men were crucified along
with Jesus that day in Jerusalem. Both the
criminal who repented, and the one who
did not, would have been "lost sheep of the
house of Israel."
THREE LOST SHEEP
On several occasions during His ministry,
Jesus proclaimed forgiveness of sins for
descendants of Abraham who turned to
Him. About a week before He went to
the cross, Jesus passed through Jericho on
His way to Jerusalem. In Jericho the tax
collector, Zacchaeus, welcomed Jesus into
his home and then proclaimed his own
repentance from past wrongs (Luke 19:8).
Jesus then said to him, "Today salvation has
come to this house, because he also is a son
of Abraham; for the Son of Man has come to
seek and to save that which was lost" (Luke
19:9, 10). Zacchaeus had an existing covenant relationship with God, as a child of
Abraham, and Jesus proclaimed him saved
when he professed his repentance. Salvation
came to the thief and to Zacchaeus in just
the same way-as children of Abraham who
repented in the presence of the Lord, before
the Old Covenant had been fulfilled by
Christ, and the New Covenant empowered
by Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection.
Earlier in Jesus' ministry, a paralyzed man
was brought to him for healing. Jesus said
to him, "Friend, your sins are forgiven you"
(Luke 5:20), and then asserted that "the
Son of Man has power on earth to forgive
sins" (Luke 5:24). This incident was in
Capernaum, apparently at Peter's home,
and again involved a Jewish man.
On another occasion, when Jesus was
a guest in a Pharisee's house, he told a
woman known to be a sinner, "Your
sins are forgiven" (Luke 7:48). Again, she
was one of the "lost sheep of the house of
Israel."
THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE
There is no difference between Jesus
forgiving the thief, the tax collector, the
paralyzed man and the sinful woman.
Each of them had a covenant relationship
with God as children of Abraham. None
of them was baptized into Christ (which
had no meaning yet), none of them was
added to a church that had not yet been
bought, nor had any responded to a gospel
of the risen Savior that had not yet been
preached. They are all examples of Jesus
fulfilling His ministry "to seek and to save
that which was lost," and reach out to "the
lost sheep of the house of Israel."
THE EXCEPTIONAL SAVIOR
What is exceptional about the account of
Jesus and the thief on the cross has nothing
to do with God's commandments for our
salvation in coming to Christ. We all must
come to terms with what was commanded
by Jesus to and through his apostles after
His resurrection, when the New Covenant
was empowered-and that clearly includes
baptism (Matthew 28:19; Mark 16:16; Acts
2:38; 22:16; Romans 6:3, 4; 1 Peter 3:21).
What is exceptional about the account of
the thief's experience on the cross is its
profound demonstration of the character
of Jesus, that He held no grudge. It is
incredible that Jesus so impressed a
dying rebel, whose inclination was at first
to ridicule Him (Matthew 27:44). It is
remarkable that in His own agony, Jesus
could empathize with the sufferings and
fears of another, and comfort him. Jesus,
as He claimed on other occasions, came
"to the lost sheep of the house of Israel,"
including paralytics and tax collectors and
known sinners and convicted robbers, and
had "authority on earth to forgive sins."
What is amazing is that He still attended
to His calling, His ministry, assisting one
more miserable sinner in the midst of
His own misery as He accomplished the
greatest deed in all of human history. Jesus
wasn't distracted then from the needs of a
sinner, and we can be assured He won't be
distracted now either.
