What the Bible says about Thief on Cross Did Not Go Immediately to Paradise
(From Forerunner Commentary)
Before looking at the specifics of this passage, it is worth remembering another common misunderstanding, the one concerning Jesus' famous statement in Luke 23:43: "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." This is Protestantism's proof text that the thief on the cross went to heaven the day he died, from which they assume that all others will too. If this rendering is correct, though, it contradicts numerous clear scriptures that show that Jesus Himself was not in Paradise that day, that the dead do not rise until the resurrection, and that even the Old Testament faithful have not gone to heaven.
In spite of all the contradictions this rendering introduces, many still stubbornly cling to it to prop up an untenable belief. As experienced Bible students know, the confusion is the result of where translators chose to insert the punctuation—in this case, a comma—that does not exist in the original language. If Scripture is to remain unbroken (see John 10:35), the comma must be placed after "today"—"Assuredly, I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise"—rather than before it.
Ezekiel 45:21 is a nearly identical occurrence. Many translators have chosen to punctuate this section so that it reads that Passover is seven days long. This rendering also causes it to say that Passover is part of the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Yet, this contradicts other clear scriptures. For example, Exodus 12:1-20 shows that the Passover is to be killed/observed at the beginning of Abib/Nisan 14, and then unleavened bread is to be eaten until the twenty-first day (which makes eight days total). Passover falls on one day, followed by seven days of Unleavened Bread. We also see this in Leviticus 23:5-6, 8:
On the fourteenth day of the first month at twilight is the LORD's Passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the Feast of Unleavened Bread to the LORD; seven days you must eat unleavened bread. . . . The seventh day shall be a holy convocation; you shall do no customary work on it.
This is very clear: Passover is observed on Abib/Nisan 14, and the Feast of Unleavened Bread starts on Abib/Nisan 15 and lasts for seven days (until Abib/Nisan 21). The exact same instruction is given in Numbers 28:16-25—Passover is on the fourteenth, and the Feast of Unleavened Bread starts on the fifteenth, lasting for seven days (until the twenty-first). These passages provide a threefold witness (see Deuteronomy 19:15; Matthew 18:16).
Nevertheless, Ezekiel 45:21 is held up as a proof text that Passover is part of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, and the whole occasion should be seven days long. This common rendering of Ezekiel 45:21 sets up two possibilities: Either God did away with His previous threefold witness with this single verse, or something is amiss in the way this odd-one-out is translated.
As it turns out, many translators have punctuated Ezekiel 45:21 without paying close enough attention to the Hebrew. Like biblical Greek, biblical Hebrew does not contain punctuation, but it does use a system of accents to indicate where pauses should occur in the text. These accents show that there should be a logical pause in the middle of the verse (see Analytical Key to the Old Testament by John J. Owens). That is, the text itself separates the mention of the Passover in the first half of the verse and the mention of the "feast of seven days" in the last half. The accents indicate that the two halves are not intended to be fused into the same instruction: First, God instructs that Passover should be "on the fourteenth day of the month," and then He commands the observance of a feast of seven days during which unleavened bread must be eaten.
A number of translations, though, have correctly picked up on this separation:
"On the fourteenth day of the first month you shall observe the feast of Passover; for seven days unleavened bread must be eaten." (New American Bible-Revised Edition)
"In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall celebrate the feast of the passover [sic], and for seven days unleavened bread shall be eaten." (Revised Standard Version)
"In the first month, the fourteenth day of the month, you shall observe the solemnity of the pasch [the Passover]: seven days unleavened bread shall be eaten." (Douay-Rheims Bible)
As with Luke 23:43, punctuation makes a big difference! The Hebrew does not say that Passover is a feast that is seven days long but that, one, the Passover must be observed on the fourteenth and that, two, for seven days unleavened bread must be eaten. A technical rendering of the Hebrew puts a logical pause in the middle, separating the two thoughts and making the instruction perfectly complementary to Exodus 12, Leviticus 23, and Numbers 28 rather than contradictory to all three.
We should also notice the instruction in Ezekiel 45:22: "And on that day the prince shall prepare for himself and for all the people of the land a bull for a sin offering." If "that day" is referring to the Passover, then this introduces another contradiction: The Passover sacrifice was to be a lamb or a kid of the goats (Exodus 12:3-5), not a bull! Jesus Christ is our Passover Lamb—not our Passover Bull. The prince's offering is for the first day of the Feast of Unleavened Bread, not the Passover.
In summary, while Ezekiel 45:21 shows that by the time of the Babylonian captivity (when Ezekiel was written) it had become common to refer to the whole eight-day festival season as "Passover," the verse does not say that Passover is the first day of Unleavened Bread. Nor does it say that the two festivals together should only be seven days long. The Bible consistently teaches that Passover and Unleavened Bread are separate festivals, each with its own detailed instructions and spiritual meanings.
In Luke 23:43, Jesus Christ tells one of the criminals being crucified next to Him, "Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise." This statement forms the foundation of belief for the majority of professing Christians that they will go to heaven as soon as they die. The common interpretation is that Jesus promises the malefactor he would be with Him in "Paradise"—assumed to be heaven—later that day, after both had died. From this scenario, they extract the theory that all of the faithful are likewise caught up to heaven immediately upon death. This verse has become the modern pillar of the ancient pagan belief that our soul lives on after the death of the body and finds its way to heaven to be with God.
The only problem is that Luke 23:43 does not support this at all!
Jesus gave only one sign that He was the One He said He was: that He would be in the grave for three days and three nights:
Then some of the scribes and Pharisees answered, saying, "Teacher, we want to see a sign from You." But He answered and said to them, "An evil and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. (Matthew 12:38-40, emphasis ours throughout)
If Jesus was not in the grave for three days and three nights, He is not our Savior! But since we know He was telling the truth, He must have been in the grave for exactly three days and three nights—thus, He could not have been in Paradise that day. Following this through, if He was not in Paradise on the day He died, neither was the criminal hanging next to Him.
The apostle Paul corroborates that Jesus did in fact fulfill His prophecy. In I Corinthians 15:3-4, he tells Christians: "For I delivered to you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; and that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures." Notice that Paul says Jesus was buried, not that the body was buried and His consciousness went to Paradise. It reads that He—Jesus, Himself, entirely—was buried. He was dead for three days. He died for our sins, was in the grave for 72 hours, then came back to life after being resurrected by the Father.
John gives further proof of where Jesus was: "Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So there [in the tomb, the grave] they laid Jesus . . ." (John 19:41-42). Similarly, Peter told those present on Pentecost, "[David], foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption." (Acts 2:31) This states that Jesus' body and soul were in "Hades" (the grave) before His resurrection, not in Paradise.
Jesus Himself tells us He was not simultaneously in the grave and in Paradise. When Mary Magdalene stood outside the tomb, she encountered the resurrected Savior (John 20:14). After He identified Himself (verse 16), He told her plainly where He had not been: "Jesus said to her, 'Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, "I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God."'" (John 20:17). Clearly, He had not been in Paradise with the Father during the time He was in the grave, thus the criminal was not either!
David C. Grabbe
What Happened to the Thief on the Cross? (Part One)Related Topics: Adulterous Generation Seeks after Sign | After Three Days | Christ's Burial | Christ's Death and Burial | Christ's Death, Resurrection, and Ascension | Doctrine of 'Immortality' of the Soul | Jesus Christ's Ascension | Jesus Christ's Burial | Jonah, Sign of | Paradise | Thief on Cross Did Not Go Immediately to Paradise | What Happened to the Thief on the Cross?
Although interpreting Luke 23:43 to say that Jesus and the criminal would both be in Paradise that very day contradicts many clear scriptures, some still hold onto this idea because of the unique construction of the sentence. They point out that, while there are many places where Jesus begins an important statement with "Assuredly, I say to you" or "Verily, I say unto thee" (KJV) or "I tell you the truth" (NIV), in no other place is the phrase accompanied by an explanatory clause relating to time—yesterday, today, etc.
Structurally, these critics say, Christ's important statements always follow a set pattern: "Assuredly, I say to you, [important statement]." In this view, to include the word "today" with the phrase "assuredly, I say to you" creates a structural anomaly. They do not argue that the structure is wrong, only that it is unlikely to have been what Jesus meant because His many other emphatic statements in the New Testament all follow the same pattern. They allege the word "today" would be superfluous if it were added to the phrase "I say to you" because "I say" is already in the present tense, which implies "today" or "now."
However, this objection overlooks a foundational and crucial point. The use of "today" or "this day" is a common idiom used by both God and man in both Testaments. This idiom adds tremendous emphasis and gravity to the statement it accompanies. Consider Deuteronomy 4:26: "I call heaven and earth to witness against you this day, that you will soon utterly perish from the land which you cross over the Jordan to possess; you will not prolong your days in it, but will be utterly destroyed" (emphasis ours).
The Hebrew behind "this day" is translated in other places simply as "today." When used in this way, it is not intended to draw attention to the 24-hour period during which it was spoken, but rather to convey the significance and solemnity of the declaration. The chapter's preceding verses reveal that God is not drawing our attention to a specific day but is demonstrating the seriousness of what He is saying by using the Hebrew idiom "this day."
This peculiar idiom appears throughout the Bible—literally hundreds of times. It is frequently used when God is speaking about the commandments He has given and when He tells His people what He expects of them. Occasionally, "this day" or "today" is not idiomatic, as when the speaker is actually drawing attention to a specific day, such as a Sabbath or other holy day. However, for the most part, this term is intended to add emphasis, solemnity, and importance.
Moreover, the words in Luke 23:43 are spoken by the same Person who used this idiom repeatedly when addressing ancient Israel. When we understand this, we can see that the comma is misplaced, and to make His statement more easily understandable, the comma should follow the word "today": "Assuredly, I say to you today, you shall be with Me in Paradise." Jesus is adding solemn emphasis to His statement that at some point the criminal would be with Him in His Kingdom on earth.
David C. Grabbe
What Happened to the Thief on the Cross? (Part Four)
When we understand that Jesus' words to the thief contain a Hebrew idiom that uses "I say to you today" to add emphasis and solemnity to a statement - and that the God of the Old Testament used this formula frequently in speaking to Israel - moving the comma after "today" makes more sense. But this begs the question: Why does Jesus speak so emphatically? The answer can be found in the unique qualities of the book of Luke. He is the only gospel writer who includes this encounter, so it is tied to his own distinct perspective.
Throughout his gospel, Luke emphasizes the fact that Christ was a man, while the other writers emphasize His kingship (Matthew), His servitude (Mark), or His divinity (John). Luke stresses Christ's humble beginnings in a manger, surrounded by shepherds and common people. He shows Jesus going through the same human experiences that everyone around Him went through. He highlights His humanity and the fact that He is the Savior of all mankind, not just of Israel. Luke, a Gentile himself, writes for other Gentiles, which is why many of his descriptions of events omit details that non-Israelites would not relate to, while emphasizing the things that all people could connect with. In Luke's writing, Jesus is depicted as the universal Man, Someone every person could identify with and respect.
This helps to explain Jesus' words to the criminal. Here is a common thug—having been caught in a crime against the state and paying the price for it—who has the audacity to beseech the dying Messiah for favor. Yet the Son of Man, the perfect Man that He is, does not brush him aside or castigate him. Instead, He recognizes that the criminal is expressing faith, however rudimentary, in the coming Kingdom of God, as well as in the fact that Jesus would not be held down by death—for the only way He could come into His Kingdom is through a resurrection from the dead.
The criminal has the eyes to see Jesus Christ for who He is. He can comprehend what would happen after Christ died. He understands that, when Jesus returns in His Kingdom, He would remember the criminal and act in a way that would be beneficial to him. Taking this a step farther, the criminal knows what condition he would be in himself—he would be dead. Thus, he knows that Christ's remembrance of him will have to begin with his own resurrection. Jesus is able to assure him that he will indeed be with Him at some point in Paradise.
Luke highlights Christ's willingness, even as His own life is draining out, to give comfort and encouragement to the man dying next to Him that he would live again and be with the Son of God in Paradise. However, He does not say this to the criminal alone. His declaration is underlined with a Hebrew idiom that is solemn and emphatic yet also universally encouraging. As long as we have not turned away, He is speaking to us also when He says, "Truly, I say to you today, you will be with Me in Paradise."
David C. Grabbe
What Happened to the Thief on the Cross? (Part Four)
Because of the widespread (and unbiblical) assumption that mankind possesses an immortal soul and that even in death the consciousness of a person lives on absent his or her body, many will take Luke 23:46 to mean that Jesus was with the Father that day in spirit form. Subsequently, they will assume that the criminal next to Him could have been as well.
However, the larger issue is what the Bible consistently shows happens at—and after—death. Yes, the spirits of both Jesus and the criminal returned to God the Father, as do the spirits of all people (Ecclesiastes 3:21; 12:7). Yet, at the same time, their consciousness ended, such that it could not be said that they—their complete persons—were with the Father. Jesus committed His spirit to the Father, yet He clearly told Mary after His resurrection, "I have not yet ascended to My Father" (John 20:17).
What does it mean that His spirit was with the Father, but not His body or soul (see Acts 2:31)? Was His spirit conscious of being in Paradise? Notice what the Word of God says:
"For in death there is no remembrance of You; in the grave who will give You thanks?" (Psalm 6:5). Thus, there is no praise of God or even contemplation of Him when a person goes into the grave—yet the spirit is with God!
"Shall Your lovingkindness be declared in the grave? Or Your faithfulness in the place of destruction? Shall Your wonders be known in the dark? And Your righteousness in the land of forgetfulness?" (Psalm 88:11-12). The psalmist calls the grave "the place of destruction," "the dark," and "the land of forgetfulness." Consequently, death is a definite stopping point, and consciousness and experience do not continue in the grave.
"The dead do not praise the LORD, nor any who go down into silence" (Psalm 115:17). If the dead are automatically taken to the presence of God, why would they not praise Him? How could any being remain silent in the presence of the most awesome Person in the universe?
"His spirit departs, he returns to his earth; in that very day his plans perish" (Psalm 146:4; our emphasis throughout). A person's spirit departs (and returns to God, as Ecclesiastes 3:21 and 12:7 show), yet at that point all of his plans (thoughts, KJV) perish. This is because the human spirit does not have consciousness inherent within it.
"Whatever your hand finds to do, do it with your might; for there is no work or device or knowledge or wisdom in the grave where you are going" (Ecclesiastes 9:10). It could not be any clearer: The condition of death means a total cessation of consciousness and awareness.
In biblical usage, death is pictured as sleeping—there is no knowledge, no comprehension of the passage of time, no recognition of God, etc. There is no consciousness. The spirit in man allows understanding (Job 32:8; I Corinthians 2:11), but it depends on a living body for consciousness. The idea that some eternal consciousness continues after death comes from paganism, not the Holy Scriptures! The spirit in man, in its most basic definition, is a person's mind (heart, attitudes, etc.), not a separate sentient being.
As a result, even though all the spirits of all the dead throughout human history have returned to the Father, Jesus' statement, "No one has ever gone into heaven" (John 3:13), demonstrates that the "spirit in man" is not the entire person, just a component. Yet, that component, absent a body (physical or spiritual) that can sustain life, has no consciousness of its own. The spirit is given or returned to a body—physical or spiritual—at the time of a resurrection (Luke 8:55). Jesus' spirit returned to the Father, yet He—the Man, the Son of God, the whole Being—did not ascend to the Father until after He was resurrected three days and three nights later.
David C. Grabbe
What Happened to the Thief on the Cross? (Part Two)Related Topics: | After Three Days | Christ's Death and Burial | Death as Cessation of Consciousness | Death Complete Cessation of Existence | Doctrine of 'Immortality' of the Soul | No One Has Ascended into Heaven | Parable of Lazarus and the Rich Man | Thief on Cross Did Not Go Immediately to Paradise | What Happened to the Thief on the Cross?