Very likely, the most well-known, nameless person in the Bible is “the thief on the cross.” The Lord demonstrated His mercy one last time before His crucifixion by pardoning the thief who begged Jesus, saying, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom” (Luke 23:42). Having the “power on Earth to forgive sins” (Matthew 9:6), and an overflowing amount of compassion, Jesus told him: “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise” (Luke 23:43).

After rehearsing the story of “the thief on the cross” countless times from Luke’s gospel account (a story that, sadly, has been misused by many to justify that a person today can be saved without being baptized “for the remission of sins”—Acts 2:38; cf. 22:16), some Bible students are puzzled when they eventually compare the “beloved physician’s” account with what Matthew and Mark recorded. Whereas Luke wrote: “Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, ‘If You are the Christ, save Yourself and us’ ” (23:39), Matthew and Mark stated the following:

“Even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him” (Matthew 27:44)

“Even those who were crucified with Him reviled Him” (Mark 15:32)

The obvious question is, why did Matthew and Mark indicate the “thieves” (plural) reviled Jesus, while Luke mentioned only one who insulted Him?

First, it is quite possible that, initially, both thieves reviled Christ, but then one of them repented. After hearing Jesus’ words on the cross, and seeing His forgiving attitude, the one thief may have been driven to acknowledge that Jesus was indeed the Messiah. How many times have we made a statement about someone or something, but then retracted the statement only a short while later after receiving more information?

A second possible explanation for the minor differences in gospel accounts regarding the two thieves who were crucified next to Jesus involves the understanding of a figure of speech known as synecdoche. Merriam-Webster defines this term as “a figure of speech by which a part is put for the whole (as fifty sail for fifty ships), the whole for a part (as society for high society)…or the name of the material for the thing made (as boards for stage)” (italics. in orig.). Just as Bible writers frequently used figures of speech such as simile, metaphor, sarcasm, and metonymy, they also used synecdoche. As seen above (in the definition of synecdoche), this figure of speech can be used in a variety of ways (see also Dungan, 1888, pp. 300-309):

• A whole can put for the part.

• A part may be put for the whole.

• Time might be put for part of a time.

• The singular can be put for the plural.

• And the plural can be put for the singular.

It is feasible that Matthew and Mark were using the plural in place of the singular in their accounts of the thieves reviling Christ on the cross. Lest you think that such might be an isolated case, notice two other places in Scripture where the same form of synecdoche is used.

Genesis 8:4 indicates that Noah’s ark rested “on the mountains of Ararat.” Question: Did the ark rest on one of the mountains of Ararat, or did it rest on all of them at the same time? Although the ark was a huge vessel, it obviously did not rest on the many mountains of Ararat; rather, it rested on one.

In Genesis 21:7 Sarah asked, “Who would have said to Abraham that Sarah would nurse children? For I have borne him a son in his old age.” Anyone who knows much about the Bible will remember that Sarah had but one child. In certain contexts, however, one might use a synecdoche and speak of one child (as did Sarah) by using the word children.

We must keep in mind that the biblical apologist does not have to pin down the exact solution to an alleged contradiction; he need show only one or more possibilities of harmonization in order to negate the force of the charge that a Bible contradiction really exists. The skeptic cannot deny that both of the above options are plausible explanations to the question of why Matthew and Mark wrote of “thieves” reviling Christ, instead of “thief.”

Problem: Matthew says here, “even the robbers who were crucified with Him reviled Him.” However, according to Luke, only one reviled Him (Luke 23:39) while the other one believed in Him, asking, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom” (Luke 23:42).

Solution: This difficulty is easily resolved on the supposition that at first both reviled the Lord, but that later one repented. Perhaps, he was so impressed hearing Jesus forgive those who crucified Him (Luke 23:34) that he was convinced that Jesus was the Savior and asked to be part of His coming kingdom (v. 42).

The “Problem”

> Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers, nor extortioners will inherit the kingdom of God. (1 Corinthians 6:9–10)

In the verses above, we see a list of unrighteous people—sinners. It is stated twice that such people will not inherit the kingdom of God.

Included in this list are thieves. So why did Jesus, as described in Luke 23:39–43, promise to one of the thieves that was crucified with Him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise”?

The Solution

Sometimes the answer to a seeming contradiction is so close that it would bite you if it could. This is the case here. Look at the very next verse in 1 Corinthians 6 to find the resolution.

> And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God. (1 Corinthians 6:11)

1 Corinthians 6 is written to Christians—followers of Jesus Christ who have had all of their many sins forgiven and washed away by the powerful cleansing blood of the crucified and risen Savior (Revelation 1:5). Through sincere repentance and union with Christ, each believer, though flawed, is forgiven and given the promise and hope of heaven (Titus 3:7).

“And such were some of you” indicates this list of sins is a record of their past, but they repented (Acts 3:19) and had been freed from the bondage of their sin (Romans 6:5–23). God no longer held these or any other sins against them because they had been sanctified and justified in the name of Jesus Christ and by the Holy Spirit (Romans 3:24–26). Regardless of what kinds of sins they had committed, they were washed clean through the grace of God.

In the account of the thieves who were crucified with Christ, the same thing took place. One thief rejected Christ and remained in his unrighteous and unworthy state. The other thief recognized Christ as Savior and turned to Him in repentance, thereby becoming washed, sanctified, and justified before God. He became acceptable in the sight of God, through the saving work of Christ, to inherit the kingdom of God.

Thieves are thought of as “bad” people. Many people would not place themselves in the same category. However, how many times does one have to steal something to become a thief? Only once.

And who among us has not taken something, even the smallest thing that did not belong to us? We are all unrighteous lawbreakers, unworthy to inherit the kingdom of God (Romans 3:23). So the question, “Can a thief go to heaven?” applies to all of us.

Conclusion

The thieves crucified with Jesus are a fitting picture of all mankind. They show us the only two possible options for entering eternity: to receive Christ’s free gift of salvation or reject it. So there’s good news! When a thief receives Christ as Lord and repents, he is no longer a thief in the eyes of God; his sin is forgiven and he is able to enter heaven. Scripture makes that plain and without contradiction.