xjwsforChrist

May you all have peace!

As most of us now, Christ is recorded to have told one of the men on the pole next to him that he (the man) would be with him (Christ) in Paradise. As to when this would occur, this verse has been stated a couple/few different ways by people of different beliefs. For some, it is stated as:

"Truly I tell you today, you will be with me in Paradise."

For others, it is stated as:

"Truly I tell you, today you will be with me Paradise."

Rather than tell what was shared with me as to which is true, partly because I am sure there will be some comments as to adhering to a WTBTS teaching, I am directed to ask those who would care to consider it this:

In the verse Christ tells the man that he (the man) would be with HIM (Christ)... in Paradise. COULD Christ have meant that the man would be with him in Paradise THAT VERY DAY? I might be wise to consider... when was CHRIST in Paradise? THAT VERY DAY... so that the man would/could BE with him there that day? Or some other day?

When did CHRIST (re)enter into Paradise (the heavens), dear ones?

My research says it was not that day, nor the next... nor even the next THREE or so days. My research says Christ went to Sheol/Hades for parts of at least three of the next few days. Did the man go with him there? If so, then is Sheol/Hades "Paradise"? My research doesn't seem to support that.

If not, when then did Christ himself (re)enter into Paradise? My research says that Christ was with his disciples for awhile after his resurrection. Was the man with him when he was with his disciples? If so, is the earth (where Christ was) "Paradise"? My research doesn't seem to support that.

If not, then when DID Christ (re)enter into Paradise? My research says that he (re)entered... when he ascended. Which was 10 days after his resurrection. Was the man with him THEN, so that they entered TOGETHER? My research doesn't seem to support this.

If not, did the man enter BEFORE Christ did? Since Christ had to open the way... that doesn't seem likely. Even so, my research doesn't seem to support this, either.

SO... if Christ didn't enter on the DAY he said [to the man] "'today'... you will be WITH me... in Paradise"... how could the man BE WITH him... IN Paradise... ON that day?? I mean, if CHRIST wasn't IN Paradise on that day...

On the other hand (and notwithstanding the fact that a certain religion NONE of us really care for might agree), if what Christ said was "I tell you today (that) you will be with me in Paradise"... as in, "Today I am telling you... you will be with me in Paradise"... the TIME frames involved would corroborate. My research does, as well.

Does yours?

If not, perhaps you might consider revisiting these events and their time frames. OR, even better... and EASIER... go to the one who SAID these words... and ask him. Directly. Then, just put faith in what HE tells you about it.

Again, peace to you all!

A slave of Christ,

Shellama

If not, then when DID Christ (re)enter into Paradise? My research says that he (re)entered... when he ascended. Which was 10 days after his resurrection. Was the man with him THEN, so that they entered TOGETHER? My research doesn't seem to support this.


Was it 10 days or 40 days after his resurrection???
Just checking?

Love Justmom

Although the WTBS proves to be wrong on many things and as to their understandings....

This particular verse with the punctuation being, " I tell you today,,,,,,,you will be with me in paradise.

They got this one right!!!

Love Justmom.

Yes. They did get this one right... but you ladies will have to tell me, did they get it right on this reasoning... or because it did not fit with their theology and so they made the issue about the comma?

Just curious.

Either way, it is true... it could not have meant that literal day, because Christ Himself was not in Paradise on that literal day.

Peace,
tammy

That's what I was wondering. Of course I agree with the comma being after today. If the watchtower hadn't had some truths in there somewhere we wouldn't have been attracted.

I can't find anything that says ten days. But Acts 1:6 says forty days.

As for the reasoning, yes WT has used this reasoning.

Cool, leaving, thanks for the answer on that one about their reasoning. I don't remember that reasoning during my study, but I know that doesn't mean it is not used. I might even simply have forgotten it... obscured under my attention to the comma argument.

Peace,
tammy

Oh, oops, sorry dear 'Mom, LQ, and everyone (peace to you!): I had it backward. He was around for 40 days after his resurrection, then 10 days after he ascended he poured out holy spirit upon those in the upper room. All I could think of was Pentecost... it being 50 days after the Passover... and that I had to hurry to take the pups to go meet hubby! My bad and my apologies!



Had to look it up, dear tec (peace to you!), but per the NWT Reference Bible (Luke 23:43, footnote, page 1279):



Per their Aid to Bible Understanding book ("Paradise," Page 1269), the WTBTS derived their understanding from similar logic (that Christ did not enter on that day but 40 days later)... per the rendering of "today" as set forth in OTHER Bible translations (Rotherham and Lamsa, and Reinhardt's German translation).

So, there you go!

Peace, all!

YSSFS of Christ,

Shellama

Yes to these understandings and also that the evildoer being wicked, and not a worshiper of Jehovah would not have the hope of ever going to heaven, therefore he could never have been in a place with Jesus .
That was only for the 144,000. His hope was to return in the long future to the earth during the resurrection right after Armageddon and then be taught how to be a good JW and if he didn't conform he'd die again in the lake of fire forever!!! FOR.....EV...ER!!!!!!

Just a little more...

Love Justmom

Yes, that's the reasoning I remember. Another thing that my study conductor would tell me is that things like "truly I tell you today" were sayings back in that day. I kind of put that on the back burner, because I really didn't know anyone who spoke that way, and didn't know if they did it back in those days either.

But years ago I was listening to this speech from Martin Luther King, and I understood more what they meant.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tb9m81OwYH0

Dang, it didn't work.

Looks like it worked to me : )

(I forgot to pay attention to how he spoke... gonna go watch it again, lol)

Peace,
tammy

Is there even one group of people other than the Jehovah's Witnesses who believe that the "today" element in Jesus' statement to the thief on the cross referred to the day he was speaking rather than the promise made to the thief?

Is there one other religious grouping that says that? One?

If so, please can you name them?

Such a grouping has to be willing to believe that Jesus, at that fundamentally important moment, chose to make a meaningless nonsense statement. Does he anywhere else in the recorded Gospels waste a word by pointing out that he is saying something on the day he is saying it?

Of course he was making a very important promise to a man who even in the moment of extremity recognised him for who he is.

Pity the people in the WT and the mindless cult-following people here don't recognise him for who he is.

Instead, they trust the voice in Shelby's head, and, surprise surprise, imagine themselves into thinking their little imaginary voice says the same.

Justmom, yes, I have heard the voice of Jesus all my life, but NOT as you and Shelby et al apparently do, as an audible voice which gives out encyclopaedic and dictionary-like information.

Let's be clear, please. Don't twist my words or include me as a voice-hearer of that ilk.

I hear and follow the voice of Jesus merely as one of the many billions all over the world over two millennia who do the same and follow him. Not in some quasi-spiritualistic, channelling sense.

Make no mistake. Don't twist my words against me. Don't include me in this new little cult. Don't pretend for one moment to yourself or anyone else that I am a Shelbyite, because Jesus Christ himself, the One who heals my soul and that of millions with his Body and Blood whenever I go to him, in common with millions of others, is the one you will have to answer to in the end.

Not the little voice in Shelby's head that gives you messages to feed on.

A few things:
The most natural reading would imply that TODAY refers to the even happening that day.
Why on earth would Christ say point out that today He was telling the thief something that the their knew he was telling him today?
The simple act of telling him at that moment means that at that moment He was telling him that.

That said, we can still see that the write may have used literalistic styling to make that passage more "stylistic".

To me the point is that the thief WOULD be with Christ in Paradise.

But, if we look at the orthodox teachings on this, we say that the opinion is that, on that day, upon his death, the thief would be with Christ in Paradise.
But as Shel pointed out, we don't have any evidence stating that Christ went to Paradise that day.
So, what happened?

First off, Paradise is NOT heaven, most view it as "Abraham's bossum" or a "level" of Heaven ( depending on their view that could be one in the same).
Some state that when Christ ascended after He preached to the spirits in "Hades", that is when He took with Him those that were to come to paradise, but that happened after the day He died ( between His death and resurrection).

Some point out that the "Be with me in paradise" doesn't mean that they will be together at the exact time and that it may mean that the thief's spirit went to paradise and that Christ would be with Him in the sense that eventually they would be together.

Some point out that just because it doesn't say Christ went to Paradise it doesn't mean He didn't.

Etc...

IMO:
It doesn't matter WHEN because the point of the dialogue is not WHEN he goes ( the thief) but THAT He goes and not because of "good works" or because he was baptized or because he was part of a group, BUT because He put his faith in Christ.