Luke 23; The Lord's Crucifixion

Matthew Henry Commentary
23:32-43 As soon as Christ was fastened to the cross, he prayed for those who crucified him. The great thing he died to purchase and procure for us, is the forgiveness of sin. This he prays for. Jesus was crucified between two thieves; in them were shown the different effects the cross of Christ would have upon the children of men in the preaching the gospel. One malefactor was hardened to the last. No troubles of themselves will change a wicked heart. The other was softened at the last: he was snatched as a brand out of the burning, and made a monument of Divine mercy. This gives no encouragement to any to put off repentance to their death-beds, or to hope that they shall then find mercy. It is certain that true repentance is never too late; but it is as certain that late repentance is seldom true. None can be sure they shall have time to repent at death, but every man may be sure he cannot have the advantages this penitent thief had. We shall see the case to be singular, if we observe the uncommon effects of God's grace upon this man. He reproved the other for railing on Christ. He owned that he deserved what was done to him. He believed Jesus to have suffered wrongfully. Observe his faith in this prayer. Christ was in the depth of disgrace, suffering as a deceiver, and not delivered by his Father. He made this profession before the wonders were displayed which put honour on Christ's sufferings, and startled the centurion. He believed in a life to come, and desired to be happy in that life; not like the other thief, to be only saved from the cross. Observe his humility in this prayer. All his request is, Lord, remember me; quite referring it to Jesus in what way to remember him. Thus he was humbled in true repentance, and he brought forth all the fruits for repentance his circumstances would admit. Christ upon the cross, is gracious like Christ upon the throne. Though he was in the greatest struggle and agony, yet he had pity for a poor penitent. By this act of grace we are to understand that Jesus Christ died to open the kingdom of heaven to all penitent, obedient believers. It is a single instance in Scripture; it should teach us to despair of none, and that none should despair of themselves; but lest it should be abused, it is contrasted with the awful state of the other thief, who died hardened in unbelief, though a crucified Saviour was so near him. Be sure that in general men die as they live.

Click to expand...

Ron Gurley said:

Study the last days of Jesus the Divine Messiah in all four Gospels...different accounts, witnesses, audience, etc....Check a Harmony of the Gospels...Study the Seven Sayings on the Cross!

Colossians 2:14
having canceled out the "certificate of debt" consisting of decrees against us (as sinners), which was hostile to us; and He has taken it out of the way, having nailed it to the cross.

1 Peter 2:24
and He Himself bore our sins in His body on the cross, so that we might die to sin and live to righteousness; for by His wounds you were healed.

Click to expand...

Yekcidmij said:

I've always been curious about the choice of the word "lestes" (Matt 27:38//Mark 15:27) and the relationship of everyone to Barabbas. Lestes seems to typically connote a bandit, terrorist, freedom fighter, rebel, brigand, etc.. (or something along those lines), not common thief, which would go well to understanding why these men are being crucified. Additionally, Rome didn't really crucify thieves (so far as I'm aware); they crucified people for crimes against the state, such as rebellion, insurrection, etc.. It seems it may be best to understand these two men as insurrectionists of some sort - as "lestes" found in other sources such as Josephus. They were rebels.

It seems there may be a relationship to Barabbas here. We read one curious detail about Barabbas:

Mark 15:7 The man named Barabbas had been imprisoned with the insurrectionists who had committed murder in the insurrection.
Lk 23:19 He was one who had been thrown into prison for an insurrection made in the city, and for murder.
Lk 23:25 And he released the man they were asking for who had been thrown into prison for insurrection and murder

Barabbas is said to have been in prison for murders committed during "the insurrection." Since Barabbas was on the same path to crucifixion at the same time as these other two "outlaws" it seems it may be fair to say that the three of these men had been involved in some sort of insurrection around this time.

We can't be sure what insurrection they were involved in since we have no direct data, other than to say it must have been somewhat small since the Romans only had three of them (they were known to crucify in large numbers if required).

The speculative side of me wonders about other things I can't prove. Josephus mentions many insurrections attempted by Jewish rebels during the late 2nd Temple period (the New Testament mentions a couple of them too), but he mentions nothing really around this time. But there is one incident found in several sources outside Josephus around this time that could have been taken by the authorities as an insurrection - the incident in the Temple with Jesus and the subsequent arrest in the garden as found in the gospels. Those two incidents seem to have been a little more rowdy than is typically imagined. It could be that these two men were involved (perhaps albeit in a very wrong-headed manner). It's not like Pilate would have left someone locked up in a jail cell for months on end waiting for a trial (that's our legal system). No, if they were committing insurrection, the Romans would have captured them if they didn't kill them on the spot, hauled them off and executed them.

So I speculate whether or not the two outlaws in fact already knew Jesus and if he knew them and whether or not the same incident against the temple led to all of their arrests. After all, in Luke 23, one of the outlaws seems to know that Jesus was innocent and tells Jesus to remember him, which could imply that he knew they guy since it's hard to remember someone you don't know.

This is very circumstantial at best though. We only have the outlaw's spoken words in Luke and no real details on what insurrection they were involved with. It was Passover after all, and so it's not hard to imagine other groups carrying out some sort of demonstration against their Roman overlords and/or client rulers in the temple. Perhaps it was small enough to be overlooked by Josephus or lost in the noise of all the other activity by similar groups. Perhaps Josephus was only giving a sample of what was going on and never intended to give an exhaustive list of all of the rebellious and/or apocalyptic activity, and so this incident just wasn't mentioned.

Click to expand...