Question | AdventAI

Pacific Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Oakland, California · Jan 16, 1879

Question.

Is there good authority for changing the punctuation in Luke 23 : 43, placing the comma after to-day?

M. H.

ANSWER.—Authors have differed in regard to this. But it can hardly be considered a question to be settled by authority. Punctuation being modern, there was no comma at all used by Luke, the writer of the text. Hence, we find texts differing in punctuation in different editions of the Bible. And, of course, where a change of the punctuation involves a doctrine by changing the construction, men will differ in their views of the proper punctuation just as far as they differ on the doctrine involved. In this case, as the common method is supposed to strengthen the theory that men receive rewards immediately after death, the majority of authors favor this method, because they believe the theory. Did the majority accept another theory, we may fairly presume they would accept another method of punctuation. Neither one nor the other being any part of the inspired text, people naturally feel free to adopt the one which they think is correct.

How can this question be settled? We fear it cannot be, to the satisfaction of all parties. No reason can be offered on either side, which will be satisfactory to those who may be unwilling to accept the faith of those opposed to them.

Is it then an indifferent matter—“a non-essential”—upon which men may differ with propriety? No, it cannot be; for, as before said, a difference in Bible doctrine is involved, and in such case the wrong cannot be equally proper with the right. The right construction is every way to be preferred.

But which is right? That punctuation is right which gives a construction to the text in harmony with the rest of the Scriptures. But this brings us back to the starting point. Men will differ as to where that harmony may be found. We will offer, then, a few reasons why we think it is proper to place the comma after the term, to-day.

1. It does no violence to the language. We find precisely the same form of expression in other texts, notably in Zech. 9 : 12, and Deut. 8 : 19, which is found in this text, if the comma is placed after to-day. It is so far allowable.

2. The request was, to be remembered when Christ comes in his kingdom. Certainly he did not come in his kingdom that day. By Rev 3 : 21, and other texts, we learn that Christ, in his mediation, occupies the throne of his Father in heaven; not his own throne, or that of his father David, Luke 1 : 32, 33. And by Rev. 11 : 14, 15, we learn that the kingdom and dominion is given to him under the sounding of the seventh trumpet.

3. Peter, speaking of the resurrection of Christ, said “his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption.” Acts 2 : 31. Here the much-coveted distinction between soul and flesh is recognized, but as Paradise is neither hell nor a place or state of corruption, we incline to the belief that Peter did not mean to say that, by the resurrection of Christ he was not left in Paradise. In truth he had not been in Paradise, either his soul or flesh, and therefore the promise of Luke 23 : 43 was not fulfilled between the death and resurrection of Christ.

4. The time when the saints receive their reward is not at their death, but at the coming of Christ and the resurrection of the dead. A few plain declarations of the sacred word settle this conclusively.

Jesus said, “For the Son of man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works.” Matt. 16 : 27. The same in Rev. 22 : 12.

Again he said, “Thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.” Luke 14 : 14.

Paul said his labors and crosses in the gospel would not advantage him if the dead rise not. 1 Cor. 15 : 32. On this Dr. Clarke comments: “What the apostle says here, is a regular and legitimate conclusion from the doctrine, that there is no resurrection; for, if there be no resurrection, then there can be no judgment; no future state of rewards and punishments; why, therefore, should we bear crosses, and keep ourselves under continual discipline? Let us eat and drink; take all the pleasure we can; for to-morrow we die, and there is an end of us forever.”

These words, both of Paul and the Doctor, are not true if men get their reward at death, and before the resurrection.

Again, Paul said that he should receive his crown at the appearing and kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ. 2 Tim. 4 : 1-8. Three things are here located in the future, each of which has a direct bearing on the prayer and promise of Luke 23 : 42, 43, namely, the appearing of Christ, the kingdom of Christ, and the time of giving rewards.

Peter confirms this most explicitly: “And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.” 1 Peter 5 : 4.

The testimony of Jesus Christ says that, under the sounding of the seventh trumpet comes “the time of the dead, that they should be judged, and that thou shouldest give reward unto thy servants the prophets, and to the saints, and them that fear thy name, small and great.” Rev. 11 : 15-18. No more can be asked to prove this point. But this being so, the popular construction of Luke 23 : 43, cannot be correct, and the common method of punctuation is not the proper one.

This change of the comma removes the event from the beginning to the close of the dispensation. But this is not the only instance where so great a change is effected by the removal of a comma. We sometime used a Bible of the American Bible Society print, which punctuated Matt. 19 : 27 as follows: “Ye which have followed me in the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory,” etc. We now use one of Oxford, England, print, which punctuates the same as follows:—“Ye which have followed me, in the regeneration when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory,” etc. They who affect such a horror of the supposed presumption of daring to change the punctuation in Luke 23 : 43, may profit by the fact that recently the American Bible Society have changed the punctuation of Matt. 19 : 27, to conform to the English method.

Likewise the former method, which is yet retained by some, in Heb. 10 : 12, is this; “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down on the right hand of God.” The present method is; “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down on the right hand of God.”

This will show that the punctuation of the Scriptures, which is entirely modern, is not regarded with so much reverence as interested writers on Luke 23 : 43 would fain make it appear. It proves, also, that there is no authority by which this question may be settled; but as knowledge of the Scriptures increases, the punctuation has been and is yet being changed accordingly.