Man on Cross next to Jesus...saved?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dave152
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
D

dave152

Guest
In recent discussion with a protestant friend, we were talking in regards to salvation. He is adamant that salvation is only achieved through a personal relationship with Christ. That faith alone in Jesus’s death and resurrection is all that is needed to reach Heaven.

Of course I supported my belief in good works as also being necessary to achieve salvation. He agreed that good works are indeed Christ-like, but are not necessary for salvation. Several times he pointed to the example of the fellow on the cross next to Jesus whom Jesus granted enternal salvation just before his death, without his ever performing good deeds.

My best answer is that this man didn’t achieve faith in Christ until moments before his death, and this particular case, through Christ’s mercy he was granted salvation on his faith alone.

Any more help in this sure to be ongoing discussion would be appreciated.
 
Saint Dimas is a canonized saint. So the Church has answered. He is saved and he is a saint.

Archbishop Sheen once noted that he was a really good thief. He stole heaven.

Luke 23:43 "He [Jesus] replied to him, ‘Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.’ The cultural context of Jesus saying “today” means before sunset (not before midnight). Because in Jewish tradition the next day begins at sunset.

Jesus died before the “Good Thief” – Saint Dimas. John 19:31-32 makes it fairly clear that the “Good Thief” was still alive near the end of the day. They had to break his legs, to make sure he would die quickly (stop breathing) and be taken down before the death before the Sabbath day (a solemn one).

I suppose the Roman Catholic explanation would be this: since the “Good Thief” died in like manner and while observing Our Lord, he probably had perfect remorse for all he had done wrong in his life. Certainly a plenary indulgence could easily have been granted St. Dimas. He spent more than a “Holy Hour” in Eucharistic Adoration (but instead of his knees he was on on his cross). And I think his “Holy Hour” counts as “good works” too.

I also think St. Paul makes it quite plain in 1 Corinthians chapter 13 that Faith and Good Works are not enough. You must also have a Christian Heart. The Good Works must come from Christian Love that can only come from a Christian Heart. Even Gifts of the Holy Spirit are not sufficient if there is not Love.

I just started RCIA, so if somebody has a correction please jump in.
 
Try this:

web.archive.org/web/20040216000122/http://ic.net/~erasmus/RAZ52.HTM

Scott
 
Turn the tables on your protestant friend… Ask, Where in the bible does it say that the thief never performed good works?

Another argument I hear, along these same lines, is that because the thief on the cross was not baptized, this proves faith alone is necessary for salvation. Again, you can turn the tables on your friend by asking, “Where in the bible does it say that the good thief was never baptized?”

Also, the argument ignores the Church-recognized concept of a baptism of desire. Clearly, in his final hours, the thief manifested a sincere attempt to accept Christ and this, even without water, is a valid form of baptism under extreme circumstances. Again, the whole point being that faith alone is not sufficient for salvation. It is the grace of the Lord that saves.
 
Sorry I want to put the Lutheran spin on this topic.

One can most likely conclude that the thief was not baptized. However, it is evident that God still extended his grace to the thief on the cross. The thief showed a definite want to not only believe but to have faith in Jesus.

Why ask about the thief, ask about infants do they do good works. Perhaps but they are far less salient than those of grown adults.

Lutherans believe that the Bible teaches that a person is saved by God’s grace alone through faith alone in Jesus Christ. Baptism, we believe, is one of the miraculous means of grace (together with God’s written and spoken Word) through which God creates and/or strengthens the gift of faith in a person’s heart (see Matt. 28:18-20; Act. 2:38; John 3:5-7; Act. 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Titus 3:5-6; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:1-4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13).
Although we do not claim to understand how this happens or how it is possible, we believe (because of what the Bible says about baptism) that when an infant is baptized God creates faith in the heart of that infant. This faith cannot yet, of course, be expressed or articulated, yet it is real and present all the same (see e.g., 1 Peter 2:21; Acts 2:38-39; Titus 3:5-6; Matt. 18:6; Luke 1:15; 2 Tim. 3:15; Gal. 3:26-27; Rom. 6:4; Col. 2:11-12; 1 Cor. 12:13). Those who have been baptized, but who no longer believe, will not be saved.
 
I just posted a link regarding salvation outside the church on another topic. The two men who were crucified along Jesus are mentioned as well. The part pertaining to them is below. The link to the full article is posted at the end.

"Of the two men who hung beside Jesus one accepted the truth of the situation; the other did not. One accepted a life after death; the other did not. One sincerely sought acceptance by Jesus; the other did not. One had Baptism of Desire; the other did not. (The probability is that neither of the two criminals had ever witnessed any of Jesus’ miracles or teachings. What they did know of Him would be considered hearsay.)

“Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying, “Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us.” The other, however, rebuking him, said in reply, “Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the same condemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we received corresponds to our crimes (admission of guilt), but this man has done nothing criminal.” Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” He replied to him, “Amen, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise (forgiveness – absolution).” " [Luke 23:39-43]”

trosch.org/for/salvation.html
 
Titus 3:3 – 3:6 explains exactly why the Thief was saved.

For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.

But when the kindness of God our Savior and {His} love for mankind appeared,

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior
 
Shibboleth said:
Titus 3:3 – 3:6 explains exactly why the Thief was saved.

For we also once were foolish ourselves, disobedient, deceived, enslaved to various lusts and pleasures, spending our life in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another.

But when the kindness of God our Savior and {His} love for mankind appeared,

He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit,

whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

If not for this, we would all be lost!
 
40.png
dave152:
In recent discussion with a protestant friend, we were talking in regards to salvation. He is adamant that salvation is only achieved through a personal relationship with Christ. That faith alone in Jesus’s death and resurrection is all that is needed to reach Heaven.

Of course I supported my belief in good works as also being necessary to achieve salvation. He agreed that good works are indeed Christ-like, but are not necessary for salvation. Several times he pointed to the example of the fellow on the cross next to Jesus whom Jesus granted enternal salvation just before his death, without his ever performing good deeds.

My best answer is that this man didn’t achieve faith in Christ until moments before his death, and this particular case, through Christ’s mercy he was granted salvation on his faith alone.

Any more help in this sure to be ongoing discussion would be appreciated.
Click to expand...
The Good thief was “Saved” under the Old Covenant. He was “Saved” just as everybody else before the Death and Resurrection, by virture of being one of Gods people and having a penitent heart. And your protestant friend is equating “Salvation” with “Justification”. We are saved by Grace through a faith that works in Charity. We are justified by Gods Grace alone.
 
Who says the good thief did not perform any good works? Admonishing sinners is a spiritual work of mercy and that is what the good thief did from the cross when he rebuke the other thief:
One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!” But the other rebuked him, saying, "Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but this man has done nothing wrong." And he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” And he said to him, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in Paradise.” (Luke 23:38-42)
 
The theological virtues of faith, hope, and love must all be present for salvation. Faith versus works is a false dichotomy.

Take a look at the Catechism of the Catholic Church. See especially the discussion of the theological virtues (§1812 etc…) and their relationship to the beatitudes, other virtues and the Ten Commandments. Study the outline and order of the table of contents for Part III: Life in Christ.

The Catechism uses the term ‘charity.’ Here is its definition (§1822): “Charity is the theological virtue by which we love God above all things for his own sake, and our neighbor as ourselves for the love of God.”

Notice, this is nothing but the fulfillment of the law as summarized by Christ in the golden rule. Consider how this relates to the Ten Commandments and works. In essence, love is the foundation of good works. Faith without works is dead. Like faith and hope, love is a gift from God (ie. it is a grace).

In the case of St. Dimas, he demonstrated love toward Christ under the circumstances. We are each held accountable for the measure of grace given.

As for baptism, the Catholic Church has always recognized baptism by water, baptism by fire, and baptism by desire. See the Catechism of the Catholic Church §§1257-61. St. Dimas was baptized by desire.
 
Remeber who the Scriptures were written to and by. Paradise is not heaven! Paradise is a place where the Jews went at death. Heaven is a place that Jesus sends ‘souls’ after He judges them! (This may be be a shock for our “saved” protestant brothers who save themselves?)

Jesus descended into hell and preached to the ‘souls’ there. Remeber our creed?

This is breif but the theif may have not gone to heaven, he may have gone to paradise instead?

So, did the theif go to heaven or to paradise/hell? Did Jesus preach to those in paradise/hell and give them an oportunity for salvation? Did the thief do a good work by proclaiming Jesus, an act we continue to read about today? A “work” (or protestant “deed”) that continues to encourage Christians today? Did the theif have the ‘desire’ to perform good works beyound his control?

CONTEXT is a terrible thing to leave out. I know first hand, as a protestant I too often ignored CONTEXT! CONTEXT in those days was only for them CATHOLICS!
 
The good points previous posters indicated:
  1. Paradise is not heaven, it’s the sheol of the Old Testament saints. Jesus did not enter heaven till 40 days after his Resurrection.
  2. The good thief entered sheol and met Christ there (“today”).
  3. When Christ resurrected (or ascended?), the thief and the rest of the OT saints entered heaven.
  4. The thief displayed hope (“Jesus, remember me”), faith (“when you come into your kingdom”) and charity ("have you no fear of God [admonish the sinner]? We suffer as our deeds deserve [repentance/atonement] but this man has done no wrong [protect a person’s reputation]’).
  5. So was he baptized? Possibly yes, by desire (but remember that sacramental baptism had not yet been instituted by Christ; that was done as he was ascending), but he died under the terms of the OT covenant. Did he do good works? You bet he did. He admonished the bad thief and defended Jesus. Did he have faith? See #4.
 
The catholic church teaches you are saved by grace alone though faith. IT also teaches the baptism of desire.
We are not as legalistic as people think we are reasonable baptism and works are normative means of salavation but the only necessary thing absolutely is God’s grace. (remeber we baptize babies what good work does a baby do?) He can make exceptions for everything else. THe catholic church proclaims the normative and helps us understand the exceptions like baptism of desire but does not judge who goes to heaven or hell. God alone judges the eternal destiny of a person.

Commmon sense tell us that the good thief could not have been baptized even if he wanted to. I don’t think the Romans were going to take him off the cross so the apostle John could give him a splash in the Jordon River.
Also as far as works did he have the oppprtunity here to perform the corporal works of mercy here? I don’t think you could do much on a cross. Simply the church ask you to cooperate with the graces that God gives you to enables you to have charity. His admonition of the bad thief shows cooperation of the grace given and a sign of charity in his life.
Beside it is possible under this circumstance for him to have absolutely no works. As Catholics view salavation a process the first process is to be saved by grace through faith. THere is nothing we can do to earn salvation at this point (justification). THis may be the point the thief was at or maybe the thief cooperated with grace (santification) another step in the salvation process. IT’s an open question as to where he was in the salvation process but we do know he was saved.
. So was he baptized? Possibly yes, by desire (but remember that sacramental baptism had not yet been instituted by Christ; that was done as he was ascending), but he died under the terms of the OT covenant. Did he do good works? You bet he did. He admonished the bad thief and defended Jesus.
Click to expand...
This is entirely false. Jesus baptized the aposltes (thus institued by Christ) thus beginning the sacramental baptism.
This baptism was different than John the Baptist who said:
John 1
33 "I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize 1] in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, (1) this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’

THe argument that the thiefs arrival to heaven was delayed until Jesus released them form sheol ie spirits in prison, Paradise etc is valid one but has nothing do with his an old covenant or new covenant distinction. Jesus was the walking new covenant if he instituded a sacrmanet while here it was valid then and there whehther it be baptism or the Lord’s Supper.
Saint Augustine said Jesus held himslef sacramentally at the consecration at the Last Supper. The first mass was said that night he didn’t need to be in heaven for that to happen. Remember Jesus is outside of time the timeline of things he could overcome.
When Jesus breathed on the apostles the holy spirit, and gave the apostles the power to forgive and retain sins before he ascended into heaven that sacrament started then it need not wait for Jesus to ascend.
Jesus clearly institued these sacrmaents while on this earth.
The New Testament (Covenant) starts with the Gospel not Acts.
 
Hi,
There is also the parable of the farmer and the workmen, who were employed at different times during the day but all received the same wages. It is at God’s discretion. The man on the cross came late in the day, but it was at God’s discretion.
I would like to thank the other respondents to particularly the ones who spoke on paradise. I was confused about the aspect of Jesus seeing him that day in paradise when I thought He ascended on the 3rd day. I dont understand the 40th?
Additionally I dont understand, the part when Jesus said to Mary "Dont cling to me etc, but later He said to Timothy feel me, put your hands in my wounds .
Hopefully you can help me here.
Christ be with you
Walk in love,http://forums.catholic-questions.org/images/icons/icon7.gif
edwinG
 
40.png
Maccabees:
.

This is entirely false. Jesus baptized the aposltes (thus institued by Christ) thus beginning the sacramental baptism.
This baptism was different than John the Baptist who said:
John 1
33 "I did not recognize Him, but He who sent me to baptize 1] in water said to me, ‘He upon whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining upon Him, (1) this is the One who baptizes in the Holy Spirit.’
Click to expand...
Hi Mac,

I stand corrected. Your assessment is postulated by St. Augustine and confirmed by St. Thomas.

Thanks.
 
40.png
porthos11:
The good points previous posters indicated:
  1. Paradise is not heaven, it’s the sheol of the Old Testament saints. Jesus did not enter heaven till 40 days after his Resurrection.
  2. The good thief entered sheol and met Christ there (“today”).
  3. When Christ resurrected (or ascended?), the thief and the rest of the OT saints entered heaven.
  4. The thief displayed hope (“Jesus, remember me”), faith (“when you come into your kingdom”) and charity ("have you no fear of God [admonish the sinner]? We suffer as our deeds deserve [repentance/atonement] but this man has done no wrong [protect a person’s reputation]’).
  5. So was he baptized? Possibly yes, by desire (but remember that sacramental baptism had not yet been instituted by Christ; that was done as he was ascending), but he died under the terms of the OT covenant. Did he do good works? You bet he did. He admonished the bad thief and defended Jesus. Did he have faith? See #4.
Click to expand...
Great summary, Porthos! I’m pasting this in my apologetics file (except for the bit on sacramental baptism)!:clapping:
 
40.png
aSaintoneday:
Just a little minor correction it is St. dismas aka the good thief, and desmas. more on him can be found at

catholic-forum.com/saints/saintd11.htm
Click to expand...
There are certainly spelling variants of this saint.
For example the following web site says St. Dimas and also explains a lot of details: saodimas.com.br/usa/quemera.htm
Three things seems to be confirmed:
*FIRST - Dismas was a renowned thief, a dangerous bandit and a fatidic. He used to do criminal activities on Judea. *
SECOND - He was from egyptian origin, pagan, not Jewish. “UP IN THE CROSS, says Saint John Crisostomo, TWO THIEVES, IMAGE OF THE JEWS AND OF THE GENTIES. THE PENITENT THIEF, THE IMAGE OF PAGANISM, WALKING IN MISTAKE, AND COMING BACK FOR THE TRUTH. THE ONE WHO REMAINED THIEF 'TILL DEATH IS THE IMAGE OF THE JEWS. UNTIL THE HOUR OF CRUXIFICATION THEY WALKED IN THE PATH OF CRIME. BUT THE CROSS DIVIDES THEM.”
THIRD - Finally: It is certain that he sheltered the Sacred Family in the desert and protected them until their entrance in Egypt.
Click to expand...
Roget's II: The New Thesaurus:
fatidic ADJECTIVE: Of or relating to the foretelling of events by or as if by supernatural means.
Click to expand...
 
40.png
porthos11:
The good points previous posters indicated:
  1. Paradise is not heaven, it’s the sheol of the Old Testament saints. Jesus did not enter heaven till 40 days after his Resurrection.
  2. The good thief entered sheol and met Christ there (“today”).
  3. When Christ resurrected (or ascended?), the thief and the rest of the OT saints entered heaven.
  4. The thief displayed hope (“Jesus, remember me”), faith (“when you come into your kingdom”) and charity ("have you no fear of God [admonish the sinner]? We suffer as our deeds deserve [repentance/atonement] but this man has done no wrong [protect a person’s reputation]’).
  5. So was he baptized? Possibly yes, by desire (but remember that sacramental baptism had not yet been instituted by Christ; that was done as he was ascending), but he died under the terms of the OT covenant. Did he do good works? You bet he did. He admonished the bad thief and defended Jesus. Did he have faith? See #4.
Click to expand...
This is true nor is it a surprise to Protestants at least Lutherans. Sheol is not Hell although some people want to translate it as thus. Yes, paradise is not necessarily heaven – most likely I would say that it is referring to “The Bosom of Abraham” or “Asleep in Christ.”

He would have to wait for judgment day just as anyone else would.

I am not up on my Catholicism when it comes to Saints but if this man was canonized would that not mean that a Catholic would have to believe that he ascended to heaven?

In 2 Corinthians it talks about paradise in a slightly different context as the third heaven. What is the third heaven? That which is above the sky and above the stars – Sheol has always been tied to the ground or in the grave – so in this instance paradise does not mean Sheol. So is Christ referring to what is before his death or what is after? I do not know.

In reference to “this very day”…… This could mean most anything – we will not know until we experience it first hand but heaven is eternal. It is timeless, the comment ‘this very day’ could still be talking about heaven.

In the end almost everyone is in agreement that the thief was saved. Whether he ascended strait to heaven, waited in the Bosom of Abraham, served penance in purgatory, or is waiting for judgment day – I at least do not know.

One thing that I do know is that with God anything is possible. An un-baptized thief on a cross repenting before death can most defiantly go strait to heaven if that is the will of God. God’s house has many rooms.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top