Thief on the Cross

[seed_time_harvest]

The thief was too late to be saved by the old testament, since his conversion came just as he was about to die, and he was too early to be saved by the new testament which came into effect after Christ death. Indeed how then was he saved?

Be mindful that JESUS told the thief on the cross that today you will be with me In paradise.

GOD loves righteousness and will do everything not only righteous but perfectly righteous.I will say that the thief on the cross wouldn't have been saved until JESUS finished HIS righteous work having mercy on us but satisfying the demand of the law which meant death for anyone breaking the law.

There was the purifying the flesh IMO this Is talking about the holy place and then their was the most holy place where only GOD can make your spirit perfect

Read
Hebrews chapter 9
King James Version

Chapter 9



1 Then verily the first covenant had also ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary.

2 For there was a tabernacle made; the first, wherein was the candlestick, and the table, and the shewbread; which is called the sanctuary.

3 And after the second veil, the tabernacle which is called the Holiest of all;

4 Which had the golden censer, and the ark of the covenant overlaid round about with gold, wherein was the golden pot that had manna, and Aaron's rod that budded, and the tables of the covenant;

5 And over it the cherubims of glory shadowing the mercyseat; of which we cannot now speak particularly.

6 Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.

7 But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:

9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;

10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

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.

18 Whereupon neither the first testament was dedicated without blood.

19 For when Moses had spoken every precept to all the people according to the law, he took the blood of calves and of goats, with water, and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book, and all the people,

20 Saying, This is the blood of the testament which God hath enjoined unto you.

21 Moreover he sprinkled with blood both the tabernacle, and all the vessels of the ministry.

22 And almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission.

23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

24 For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:

25 Nor yet that he should offer himself often, as the high priest entereth into the holy place every year with blood of others;

26 For then must he often have suffered since the foundation of the world: but now once in the end of the world hath he appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of himself.

27 And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

28 So Christ was once offered to bear the sins of many; and unto them that look for him shall he appear the second time without sin unto salvation.

 

[bluto]

Did you check out the video in post 115?

Sure I listened to what this "clueless" guy had to say and he brought up the same argument I've head before for over 56 years, the "robber" was in the old covenant. Did it ever occur to you that to use that "not in the old covenant excuse" actually makes it harder for the folks in the new coveant?

What do I mean? The Old Testament saints were saved just like the New Testaments saints, by grace through faith. Why in the world did the Apostle Paul teach at Romans 4:1-3 that Abraham was justified by faith? In fact, your guy in the video mentioned Job, David and others. Look what Paul said at Romans 4:6, "just as David also speaks of the blessing (what blessing?) upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness APART FROM WORKS."

So, if the thief under the old covenant was saved without being baptised why would God make it harder under the new covenant to get water baptised (which is a work) or your not saved unless you do?

Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

In other words, water baptism , like the Flood is only a "figure" (antitupo9n, counterpart, represention) which are the figures of the true. It takes more than washing in water (the putting away of the filth of the flesh) to CLEANSE FROM SIN. So, it is not the water itself which saves, but Jesus Christ, who btw is symbolized by the ark.

Cleansing only comes by the shed blood of the Son of God because God looks beyond the act of baptism and searches to see whether the believer has truly repented and dedicated his life to divine service. What you and your church have done is gone astray from the truth upsetting the faith of many by this false teaching. Repent!

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[JaumeJ]

People claim to believe our Father, yet they do not understand that all who believed Him before Jesus, believed Jesus...………..now how werd is that. Good night fro over here……..God bless all who believe God, amen...…….j

 

[TooFastTurtle]

There is an interesting parallel between circumcision in the Abrahamic covenant, and baptism in the New Covenant.

This is even more clear when we take into account Galatians chapter 3, where it is said that those who are in Christ, are Abraham's seed.

I am not dogmatic on this, but I see it as a possibility that baptism in the New Covenant is equivalent to circumcision in the Abrahamic covenant because the Abrahamic covenant was forever, the Scriptures say that, Hebrews says a change in priesthood requires a change in the law as well, and Paul the Apostle says:

"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” "

As you mentioned in your starter @Wansvic

Do you, brothers and sisters see it like this also? That the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision is forever as the Scriptures state, but has "changed form" so to speak due to the change to the law when the priesthood changed and is now continued on in the ceremony of Baptism?

 

[Wansvic]

Sure I listened to what this "clueless" guy had to say and he brought up the same argument I've head before for over 56 years, the "robber" was in the old covenant. Did it ever occur to you that to use that "not in the old covenant excuse" actually makes it harder for the folks in the new coveant?

What do I mean? The Old Testament saints were saved just like the New Testaments saints, by grace through faith. Why in the world did the Apostle Paul teach at Romans 4:1-3 that Abraham was justified by faith? In fact, your guy in the video mentioned Job, David and others. Look what Paul said at Romans 4:6, "just as David also speaks of the blessing (what blessing?) upon the man to whom God reckons righteousness APART FROM WORKS."

So, if the thief under the old covenant was saved without being baptised why would God make it harder under the new covenant to get water baptised (which is a work) or your not saved unless you do?

Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

In other words, water baptism , like the Flood is only a "figure" (antitupo9n, counterpart, represention) which are the figures of the true. It takes more than washing in water (the putting away of the filth of the flesh) to CLEANSE FROM SIN. So, it is not the water itself which saves, but Jesus Christ, who btw is symbolized by the ark.

Cleansing only comes by the shed blood of the Son of God because God looks beyond the act of baptism and searches to see whether the believer has truly repented and dedicated his life to divine service. What you and your church have done is gone astray from the truth upsetting the faith of many by this false teaching. Repent!

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

I really don't see how being obedient to God's command is a hard thing.

 

[Wansvic]

There is an interesting parallel between circumcision in the Abrahamic covenant, and baptism in the New Covenant.

This is even more clear when we take into account Galatians chapter 3, where it is said that those who are in Christ, are Abraham's seed.

I am not dogmatic on this, but I see it as a possibility that baptism in the New Covenant is equivalent to circumcision in the Abrahamic covenant because the Abrahamic covenant was forever, the Scriptures say that, Hebrews says a change in priesthood requires a change in the law as well, and Paul the Apostle says:

"In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.” "

As you mentioned in your starter @Wansvic

Do you, brothers and sisters see it like this also? That the Abrahamic covenant of circumcision is forever as the Scriptures state, but has "changed form" so to speak due to the change to the law when the priesthood changed and is now continued on in the ceremony of Baptism?

This truth is definitely seen in the bible record. Some see it and some don't. However, when one is open God will reveal it.

There is a thread on here that touches on that: O.T. Circumcision a foreshadow of N.T. Water Baptism.

 

[bluto]

I really don't see how being obedient to God's command is a hard thing.

It's not a matter that being obedient is a hard thing. My post went completely over your head. It's a matter of correct Orthodox theology. The word "Orthodox" means, "right belief." In fact, you made this statement one post above #126, "This truth is definitely seen in the bible record. Some see it and some don't. However, when one is open God will reveal it."

So my question is what makes you think your more open to what God is teaching than anybody else? In other words, how come your right and I'm not? This reminds me of the saying or concept of "Private interpretation or saying, "That's your interpretation," with the unspoken assumption that your interpretation and my interpretation can be equally valid despite the fact they contradict each other.

The Scriptures do not contradict themselves. When we disagree, your view may not be correct, mine may not not be correct meaning that we both can be wrong. There may be thousands of "applications"of a given text, but there IS ONLY ONE CORRECT MEANING.

Now, please explain why my post to you is incorrect? How do we reconcile what your guy said in the video and on what basis do you agree with him? Remember, anybody can state a position but when it comes to the Bible, you have to prove your position. I also notice that your posting what others are saying by way of video and I have not heard word one of what you personally think as to what you believe and why you believe it?

I specifically ask you was the thief on the cross saved or lost and was he with Jesus in Paradise that day? It does not matter what covenant the their was in, was he saved by grace through faith? In fact, according to the text did the thief repent? Balls in your court.

IN GOD THE SON,
maverick

 

[Wansvic]

It's not a matter that being obedient is a hard thing. My post went completely over your head. It's a matter of correct Orthodox theology. The word "Orthodox" means, "right belief." In fact, you made this statement one post above #126, "This truth is definitely seen in the bible record. Some see it and some don't. However, when one is open God will reveal it."

So my question is what makes you think your more open to what God is teaching than anybody else? In other words, how come your right and I'm not? This reminds me of the saying or concept of "Private interpretation or saying, "That's your interpretation," with the unspoken assumption that your interpretation and my interpretation can be equally valid despite the fact they contradict each other.

The Scriptures do not contradict themselves. When we disagree, your view may not be correct, mine may not not be correct meaning that we both can be wrong. There may be thousands of "applications"of a given text, but there IS ONLY ONE CORRECT MEANING.

Now, please explain why my post to you is incorrect? How do we reconcile what your guy said in the video and on what basis do you agree with him? Remember, anybody can state a position but when it comes to the Bible, you have to prove your position. I also notice that your posting what others are saying by way of video and I have not heard word one of what you personally think as to what you believe and why you believe it?

I specifically ask you was the thief on the cross saved or lost and was he with Jesus in Paradise that day? It does not matter what covenant the their was in, was he saved by grace through faith? In fact, according to the text did the thief repent? Balls in your court.

IN GOD THE SON,
maverick

The thief was saved and went into Paradise that day. Jesus said it, and that settles it. What is important to understand is that the NT mandate to believe, repent, get water baptized in Jesus' name and receive the Holy Ghost began on the Day of Pentecost. These requirements held no spiritual significance until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. After which time, the NT church was birthed when Jesus poured the Holy Spirit (John 15:26; Luke 24:45-49) into mankind at Pentecost.

Your comment: "Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." This scripture indicates that ONLY because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ does one's obedience to water baptism have any effect on their salvation. There is nothing that can change the fact that the above scripture expresses specifically that "baptism now saves."

Remember salvation is by God's design. After seeing the commands for the NT church, by faith one steps out and obeys the commands because they believe they are necessary because God said so. Through obedience people are brought back into right standing with God.

The first post outlines what is gleaned from the Word on the topic.

 

[Wansvic]

Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

Something to notice about the scripture you mention is the fact that it shows a distinction between OT and NT principles. When Peter states that baptism now saves. He goes on to say NOT BECAUSE IT REMOVES DIRT FROM THE FLESH; a reference to OT purification rituals. No. Obedience to NT baptism now saves ONLY because of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If Jesus had not died on the cross there would be no need to get water baptized in His name.

 

[bluto]

The thief was saved and went into Paradise that day. Jesus said it, and that settles it. What is important to understand is that the NT mandate to believe, repent, get water baptized in Jesus' name and receive the Holy Ghost began on the Day of Pentecost. These requirements held no spiritual significance until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. After which time, the NT church was birthed when Jesus poured the Holy Spirit (John 15:26; Luke 24:45-49) into mankind at Pentecost.

Your comment: "Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." This scripture indicates that ONLY because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ does one's obedience to water baptism have any effect on their salvation. There is nothing that can change the fact that the above scripture expresses specifically that "baptism now saves."

Remember salvation is by God's design. After seeing the commands for the NT church, by faith one steps out and obeys the commands because they believe they are necessary because God said so. Through obedience people are brought back into right standing with God.

The first post outlines what is gleaned from the Word on the topic.

You just said the following which I agree with, "The thief was saved and went into Paradise that day. Jesus said it, and that settles it." Then you went on to say this: "What is important to understand is that the NT mandate to believe, repent, get water baptized in Jesus' name and receive the Holy Ghost began on the Day of Pentecost. These requirements held no spiritual significance until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. After which time, the NT church was birthed when Jesus poured the Holy Spirit (John 15:26; Luke 24:45-49) into mankind at Pentecost."

If as you say these requirements held no spiritual significance until AFTER Jesus' death etc. and now the NT church is birthed then answer me this question? Why did the Apostle Paul bring up Abraham at Romans 4:3 and tell us, "And Abraham beleived God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?" Even at Romans 4:6 the Apostle Paul (who btw is a very smart apostle) says of King David, "just as David also speaks of the blessing upon the man to whom God RECKONS RIGHTEOUSNESS apart from works."

And notice Romans 4:9, "Is this blessing then upon the circumcised, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say, Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness." If you read the rest of the context of Romans 4 Paul is taklking about the relationship between OT circumcision and NT baptism. What's interesting is Paul is making the point that Abraham was justified by faith at least 14 years before he was circumcised. This means circumcision like water baptism is NOT essentioal to salvation. Man can do nothing to earn salvation no matter how much you and that guy on your video want to "spin" it. You not taking into account the whole picture of scripture but cherry picking verses that only "appear" to agree with your position.

So, how are you going to reconcile what Paul said about Abraham and David in the OT with you saying things were different in the NT after Jesus' death, resurrection and the starting of the Chruch?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

 

[TooFastTurtle]

Something to notice about the scripture you mention is the fact that it shows a distinction between OT and NT principles. When Peter states that baptism now saves. He goes on to say NOT BECAUSE IT REMOVES DIRT FROM THE FLESH; a reference to OT purification rituals. No. Obedience to NT baptism now saves ONLY because of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. If Jesus had not died on the cross there would be no need to get water baptized in His name.

Do you believe in speaking in tongues as evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit?

 

[Wansvic]

Do you believe in speaking in tongues as evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit?

Yes. I see that recorded in the Word.

 

[Wansvic]

You just said the following which I agree with, "The thief was saved and went into Paradise that day. Jesus said it, and that settles it." Then you went on to say this: "What is important to understand is that the NT mandate to believe, repent, get water baptized in Jesus' name and receive the Holy Ghost began on the Day of Pentecost. These requirements held no spiritual significance until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. After which time, the NT church was birthed when Jesus poured the Holy Spirit (John 15:26; Luke 24:45-49) into mankind at Pentecost."

If as you say these requirements held no spiritual significance until AFTER Jesus' death etc. and now the NT church is birthed then answer me this question? Why did the Apostle Paul bring up Abraham at Romans 4:3 and tell us, "And Abraham beleived God, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness?" Even at Romans 4:6 the Apostle Paul (who btw is a very smart apostle) says of King David, "just as David also speaks of the blessing upon the man to whom God RECKONS RIGHTEOUSNESS apart from works."

And notice Romans 4:9, "Is this blessing then upon the circumcised, or upon the uncircumcised also? For we say, Faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness." If you read the rest of the context of Romans 4 Paul is taklking about the relationship between OT circumcision and NT baptism. What's interesting is Paul is making the point that Abraham was justified by faith at least 14 years before he was circumcised. This means circumcision like water baptism is NOT essentioal to salvation. Man can do nothing to earn salvation no matter how much you and that guy on your video want to "spin" it. You not taking into account the whole picture of scripture but cherry picking verses that only "appear" to agree with your position.

So, how are you going to reconcile what Paul said about Abraham and David in the OT with you saying things were different in the NT after Jesus' death, resurrection and the starting of the Chruch?

IN GOD THE SON,
bluto

Getting off for tonight. Will respond tomorrow.
God Bless!

 

[TooFastTurtle]

Yes. I see that recorded in the Word.

I don't know about your experience. But for me: Speaking in tongues did not happen at water baptism, it happened later. How about you?

 

[seed_time_harvest]

Do you believe in speaking in tongues as evidence of baptism in the Holy Spirit?

How would you know that the person Is speaking In tongue In TRUTH since man can only look at OUTward appearances I mean If I started speaking jibberish how would you be able to say this Is evidence?

 

[Ahwatukee]

Have you ever wondered how the thief on the cross entered into Paradise without following the New Testament covenantal responsibilities outlined in Acts 2:38?:
“Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sin, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

Even if the thief wanted to be obedient, coming down off of the cross was not an option. How then is it possible that Jesus could tell the thief that he would be with Him that day in Paradise?

In order to be saved, the man beside Jesus would have been responsible to meet God’s Old Testament commands because Jesus had not died and resurrected yet.

The New Testament rebirth requirements began after Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection and ascension into the heavens. We know this because on the day that the church was born, Peter stated that we must repent, be water baptized in Jesus name, and receive the Holy Ghost in order to be saved. The Holy Ghost was not sent until after Jesus ascended back into Heaven and poured His blood upon the mercy seat. (Hebrews 9:11-12) After Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in the Heavenlies, the Holy Ghost (gift of the Holy Ghost) was then poured out upon the people present on the Day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:3-4)

Greetings Wansvic,

You are answering your own question. The man on the cross was saved as all are saved and that by having faith in Christ alone, not baptism, no works, no by following the law, etc. When the man said, "Lord, remember me when you come into your kingdom," he was confessing Christ. That becomes apparent because Jesus was hanging on the cross and dying.

Being saved only from Pentecost on is not true. Remember, when Jesus healed the paralytic, for the benefit of the Pharisees and those with them, Jesus said, "Your sins are forgiven." Take up your matt and go home. The same is true of Cornelius household, who while Peter was still speaking the Holy Spirit fell upon them and they all spoke in languages and prophesied and that without first being baptized, doing any good works or keeping the law. Later, Peter said that God who knows the heart cleansed their hearts through faith.

When Jesus said to the thief, "Truly I say to you, today you will be with Me in paradise," He was referring to the departures of their spirits at the time of death to that place of comfort/paradise in Hades where Abraham and Lazarus were as revealed in the event of the rich man and Lazarus. Hades had two areas. On one side a place of comfort/paradise which is where the spirits of Abraham, Lazarus and all the other OT saints were, which was separated by a great chasm. On the other side of that chasm is where the rich man and all the other spirits of the unrighteous dead were/are in torment in flame.

 

[Whispered]

Have you ever wondered how the thief on the cross entered into Paradise without following the New Testament covenantal responsibilities outlined in Acts 2:38?:
“Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sin, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.”

Even if the thief wanted to be obedient, coming down off of the cross was not an option. How then is it possible that Jesus could tell the thief that he would be with Him that day in Paradise?

In order to be saved, the man beside Jesus would have been responsible to meet God’s Old Testament commands because Jesus had not died and resurrected yet.

The New Testament rebirth requirements began after Jesus’ death, burial, resurrection and ascension into the heavens. We know this because on the day that the church was born, Peter stated that we must repent, be water baptized in Jesus name, and receive the Holy Ghost in order to be saved. The Holy Ghost was not sent until after Jesus ascended back into Heaven and poured His blood upon the mercy seat. (Hebrews 9:11-12) After Jesus entered the Holy of Holies in the Heavenlies, the Holy Ghost (gift of the Holy Ghost) was then poured out upon the people present on the Day of Pentecost. (Acts 2:3-4)

When did the New Covenant officially begin? We know from scripture that John the Baptist’s ministry was to prepare the way of the Lord. He was referred to as the Baptist, because in addition to proclaiming the coming of the Lord, his ministry was to initiate the concept of water baptism. Water baptism was necessary for the remission of sin. (Acts 2:38) However, sins could not be remitted without the shedding of blood. After Jesus’ blood was shed it had to be poured onto the mercy seat. This had not taken place prior to John’s ministry.

Jesus appeared after His resurrection and fulfilling the mission as our high priest, returned for a period of 40 days and then ascended back into Heaven. The New Testament church had officially begun. After this occurred, individuals who had been baptized by John were commanded to be re-baptized in Jesus name. (Acts 19:2-6)

Keep in mind that a Will and Testament becomes valid only after one’s death. This being said, you may wonder what the thief’s covenantal responsibility would entail. The Old Testament was still in effect at the time of the thief’s death.

Each person, including the thief on the cross, that perished before Jesus entered into the holy place and obtained eternal redemption for mankind, was judged by the Old Testament mandates. The obligation to God then was to have faith in the coming Messiah and to be circumcised.

Genesis 17:10 states, “This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised... He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant.”

The New Testament parallel of the Old Testament circumcision is found in Colossians Chapter 2: “In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.”

The thief to Jesus' right knew who Jesus was. We may presume that is because he had occasion to listen to Jesus preach.
Jesus said, no one comes to the Father but through Me. The thief not only demonstrated great faith in Jesus, as @JaumeJ also stated, but Jesus himself realizing this faith promised that thief the grace filled blessing Jesus' preaching promised all who listened and repented so as to follow our Lord .

 

[calibob]

The thief to Jesus' right knew who Jesus was. We may presume that is because he had occasion to listen to Jesus preach.
Jesus said, no one comes to the Father but through Me. The thief not only demonstrated great faith in Jesus, as @JaumeJ also stated, but Jesus himself realizing this faith promised that thief the grace filled blessing Jesus' preaching promised all who listened and repented so as to follow our Lord .

Could it be because a repent heart is of more value than following the rules? Is it because the Lord decides who will go to paradise and not what is written? Then there is grace something not earned or deserved which is a gift to the repentant who believe that Jesus is Lord?

 

[Whispered]

Could it be because a repent heart is of more value than following the rules? Is it because the Lord decides who will go to paradise and not what is written? Then there is grace something not earned or deserved which is a gift to the repentant who believe that Jesus is Lord?

Very well said!

 

[mailmandan]

Also, look at 1 Peter 3:21, "And corresponding to that, (please read the previous verses for context) baptism now saves you, (how) NOT THE REMOVAL OF DIRT FROM THE FLESH, but an appeal to God FOR A GOOD CONSCIENCE--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

In other words, water baptism , like the Flood is only a "figure" (antitupon, counterpart, represention) which are the figures of the true. It takes more than washing in water (the putting away of the filth of the flesh) to CLEANSE FROM SIN. So, it is not the water itself which saves, but Jesus Christ, who btw is symbolized by the ark.

Cleansing only comes by the shed blood of the Son of God because God looks beyond the act of baptism and searches to see whether the believer has truly repented and dedicated his life to divine service. What you and your church have done is gone astray from the truth upsetting the faith of many by this false teaching. Repent!

Amen! The Greek word “antitupon,” as used in I Peter 3: 21, is “an adjective, used as a noun,” and denotes, in the NT, “a corresponding type,” being “said of baptism.” “The circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism forms “a corresponding type,” each setting forth the spiritual realities of the death, burial, and resurrection of believers in their identification with Christ. It is not a case of type and antitype, but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type.” Noah was saved by the ark “through (via) water.” Water was not the means of their salvation, but the ark. The ark is what both delivered and preserved them, the two aspects of “salvation.” Their “salvation” was typical of the salvation promised to the Christian. It pictured it. So also does Christian baptism picture the death, burial and resurrection of 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 CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.