| The Criminals on the Crosses |
How many criminals who were crucified at the same time as Jesus was werethere who repented? Were there none or one? By reading most versions of the Gospels, thereader cannot be sure. This can give atheists the opportunity to say that the Bible iscontradictory in this instance. Would they be right? This essay attempts to answer thatquestion.
First, I shall examine what is recorded in Matthew27: 44, Mark 15: 37, andLuke 23: 39-41 in the King James Version and theConcordant Literal New Testament. Then, I shall examine five other versions which bring inother aspects.
| Versions Compared |
| CLNT | Concordant Literal New Testament | NAB | New American Bible |
| IV | Inspired Version | TDB | The Dartmouth Bible |
| KJV | King James Version | WAS | Worrell New Testament |
| MSNT | The Modern Speech New Testament |
| The Accounts |
Matthew 27: 44
Mark 15: 37
Luke 23: 39-41
| KJV | The thieves also, which were crucified with him,cast the same in his teeth. And they that were crucified with him reviled him. And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him saying,If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost thou not fear God, seeing thou art inthe same condemnation? And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath donenothing amiss. |
| CLNT | Now with the same, the robbers also, who are crucified with Him,reproached Him. And those crucified together with Him reproached Him. Now one of the hanged malefactors blasphemed Him, saying,"Are not you Christ? Save yourself and us!" Yet answering, the other one,rebuking him, averred, "Yet you are not fearing God, seeing that you are in thesame judgment! And we, indeed, justly, for we are getting back the deserts of what wecommit, yet this One commits nothing amiss." |
Matthew and Mark agree that both criminals reviled Jesus, while Luke recordsthat only one reviled him. There is definitely a disagreement here. This poses a problem forthose Christians who claim that God is the author of the Bible or that He dictated what waswritten. This would suggest that either God changed His mind or that He really did not knowfor sure. No true believer in God would accept either premise. It would be better to saythat God inspired the writers to record the episode in their own words as they recalled theevents at a later date.
The theory that there were actually four criminals has to be rejected. Itis true that the men described by Luke were called by different names and that they reacteddifferently from those described by Matthew and Mark. However in Matthew 27: 38, Mark 15: 27,and Luke 23: 32-33, it is stated that there were two who were crucified and that one was onthe right of Jesus and the other was on the left. Thus, there could not have been four others,given the placement and the time element.
All other versions examined, except those listed below, agree with the twoversions above in what is reported in the three gospels. Like the Concordant Literal NewTestament, they all have their own wording in describing the event. However, none make anynote that Luke does not agree with Matthew and Mark in the number of criminals who reviledJesus.
| IV | One of the thieves also, which were crucified with him,cast the same into his teeth. But the other rebuked him, saying, Dost thou not fear God,seeing thou art under the same condemnation; and this man is just, and hath not sinned; andhe cried unto the Lord that he would save him. And one of them who was crucified with him, reviled him also, saying,If thou art the Christ, save thyself and us. And one of the malefactors who was crucified with him, railed on him,saying, If thou be the Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering, rebuked him,saying, Dost thou not fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we indeedjustly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this man hath done nothing amiss. This version is a correction of the King James Version through inspirationfrom God. The discrepancy has been eliminated with the record of Luke being considered tobe correct. Whereas many Christians accept that God inspired the original writers, theyreject the idea that He would inspire this interpreter. Yet, at the same time, they willaccept other versions in which men have made changes. Unfortunately, there are correctionsin other passages of this version which are very questionable. However, the other versionscan likewise be similarly criticised. |
| NAB | The revolutionaries who were crucified with him alsokept abusing him in the same way. Those who were crucified with him also kept abusing him. Now one of the criminals hanging there reviled Jesus, saying"Are you not the Messiah? Save yourself and us." The other, however, rebukinghim, said in reply, "Have you no fear of God, for you are subject to the samecondemnation? And indeed, we have been condemned justly, for the sentence we receivedcorresponds to our crimes, but this man has done nothing criminal." Footnote: This episode is recounted only in this gospel. The penitent sinnerreceives salvation through the crucified Jesus. This version notes the difference in that the event was recorded by Lukeonly. It should be noted in this regard that it is not uncommon for an event to be recordedin any number, but not all, of the gospels. Nevertheless, this does not account for thediscrepancy in the number of criminals who reviled Jesus. |
| MSNT | Insults of the same kind were heaped on Him even by the robberswho were crucified with Him. Footnote: [Robbers] The impenitent robber probably cursed Jesus in a loudvoice, and his words were heard even by the crowd that stood a short distance off, and (nonice discriminations being made) the general belief and impression was that his companionwas joining in. Luke however, who as a physician was brought into close contact with thewomen of the early Church, may have had reported to him by those of them who stood at thevery foot of the cross the conversation carried on in low voices between Jesus and thepenitent robber, which perhaps they and the beloved disciple alone heard (Luke xxiii. 39-43;John xix. 25). -- ED. Even the men who were being crucified with Him heaped insults on Him. Now one of the criminals who had been crucified insulted Him, saying, "Are not you the Christ? Save yourself and us." But the other, answering, reproved him. "Do you not also fear God," he said, "when you are actually suffering the same punishment?And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving due requital for what we have done.But He has done nothing amiss." With all the noise of the moment, this explanation is plausible. John reportsthat he and the women were close to Jesus. It is quite probable that the repentant criminalspoke in a much lower voice than the crowd of revilers. Thus, very few people in attendancewould have heard him speak. All the accounts most likely were written later than when thereports were given to them. If this be the case, there would have been no intention oftelling conflicting stories. This explanation would confirm the accounts in the InspiredVersion and vindicate all the other versions. |
| TDB | Omitted. Omitted. And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying,If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dostthou not fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? And we justly; for we receivethe due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. This is an abbreviated version of the King James Version. The compilerseliminated repetitions for easier reading. The Gospels are combined because of therepetition. In this instance, Luke's account was the one accepted, thus eliminating thediscrepancy. No reason is given in the notes at the back of the book for this choice. |
| WAS | And the robbers, who were crucified with Him were reproaching Himwith the same thing. Footnote: The robbers ... with the same thing; they joined with the rabblein upbraiding Jesus for a time; but one of them repented later, (see Luke 23:39-43). And those who were crucified with Him were reproaching Him. And one of the suspended malefactors kept reviling Him, saying,"Art not Thou the Christ? Save Thyself and us!" But the other, answering andrebuking him, said, "Do you not fear God, seeing that you are in the same condemnation?and we, indeed, righteously; for we are receiving the due reward of our deeds; but This Mandid nothing amiss." Footnote: One of the malefactors; Matthew and Mark represent both of themalefactors as reviling Jesus. One repented, however, and was saved. This version brings in another aspect. One of the criminals changed from astance of being critical to one of being repentant. Here, being saved means that herecognized his sins, repented, and accepted Jesus as the Messiah. In return, Jesus acceptedthe repentance. This explanation of what happened vindicates the reporting of thediscrepancy in the many versions. However, it is not stated why this view was taken. |
| Commentary |
The Scholars Version follows the samereporting as the King James Version. However, in their search for the actual words of Jesus,the translators have rejected the words attributed to Jesus when He was on the cross. Theycredit them to the gospel writers. Thus, this version really adds nothing to the discussionof this essay.
Considering all the versions, it would appear that the apparent discrepancyarises from the weakness of human reporting. It is not an error of God. The noise of theoccasion and the later recording would be contributing factors. Although what was seen andheard by various individuals has been written down, a question still remains. Why did notmore translators make a comment on the difference?
The lesson here is the necessity of searching for answerswhen a question is posed. Generalizing can lead to false conclusions.