Christ's Promise to the Thief.
By J. R. Whitham
WITH those who hold that death is a separation of soul and body, that the soul is immortal, and that the righteous are rewarded immediately after death, Luke 23: 42, 43, seems to afford proof at once the most satisfactory and unanswerable. So long as the passage referred to remains as it is without explanation, so long will the minds of those who advocate the popular view remain unchanged. It is in vain that you direct their attention to the many passages in the Bible, that represent death as a sleep, and to the fact that the rewards of both the righteous and the wicked are almost invariably spoken of in connection with the resurrection, or the coming of Christ, and that Christ had not yet ascended to his Father even on the day upon which he arose. This passage alone is deemed sufficient to overbalance all other passages, however conflicting. The explanation commonly given by those who hold the opposite view, in order to make the passage harmonize with other portions of Scriptures, is to make the word to-day qualify the preceding part of the sentence. This is done by changing the punctuation—by placing the comma, which precedes, after to-day; although the harmony sought may in this way be gained, yet the explanation does not afford entire satisfaction, even to all who reject the popular view. To some, at least, the explanation seems rather forced, especially when viewed in the light of the original Greek. The prayer of the thief was this, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” He did not ask to be remembered the very day upon which they hung on the cross; neither is there any evidence for the belief that the thief or any one else supposed that Christ would come in his kingdom that day. The very language of the thief shows the contrary belief in his case. According to the original, he wished to be remembered when the Saviour would come not into his kingdom, but in his kingdom in power. As it was, he was stripped at that time, of power, and was about to sink under the dominion of death. The time when he should come clothed in power, instead of being at that very time, was doubtless understood to be away along in the future. Now let us notice the Saviour's answer, “Verily I say unto thee, this day shalt thou be with me in Paradise.” I use the expression this day instead of to-day because the word here rendered to-day can with equal propriety be rendered this day and is often thus rendered. But to what day does the Saviour allude? Doubtless the day or time when he should come in his kingdom. His kingdom was in the future, and he makes use of the future tense. But again, the word translated to-day will admit of another rendering. The original word is semeron which is equivalent to temeron, and the latter is to hemera. Now every Greek scholar knows that the connection sometimes requires that the Greek article should be rendered, “that.” The expression te hemera, which is a noun with the article prefixed, might therefore be rendered that day. Its equivalent might also with equal propriety be rendered that day. If we turn to 1 Thess. 5: 4, we will find that hemera preceded by the article is rendered that day. The day of the Lord is spoken of in verse 2, and in verse 4 there is reference to the same day. Taking the two verses together they will read thus: “For yourselves know perfectly, that the day of the Lord so cometh as a thief in the night. But ye, brethren are not in darkness, that that day should overtake you as a thief.” We thus see the propriety, as well as beauty, of rendering the article in this connection, that. Now if we turn back to the passage referred to in the first part of this article, and substitute that day for to-day, we will at once see the propriety of this rendering, the passage would thus read: “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That day shalt thou be with me in paradise.”