Bible Breath

The Four Crucified with Christ

Posted in Working the Word by Mr. Augie on April 16, 2011

The biblical study on The Four Crucified with Christ teaches much of how to study the Bible and many times that traditions contradict the truth. There are many things commonly taught about Easter that are not what the truth of God’s magnificent Word teaches. The four crucified with Christ is just one of them and it is one I have diligently worked through the Word for myself. John Schoenheit, one of the finest biblical researchers and teachers I have known says it much better than I can. The full article and video can be found here. Enjoy. — Augie

One difference that we should note as we read the crucifixion records is that Matthew 27:38 (ESV) and Mark 15:27 (ESV) clearly state that there were “two robbers” crucified, while Luke 23:32 (ESV) says there were “two criminals” crucified. Other versions such as the NIV, NASB, and RSV also use the translations “robber” and “criminal,” while other versions use different words, such as “thief” and “malefactor” (KJV). While it is clear that a robber is a criminal, and so these might be the same set of two men, it should nevertheless catch our attention that the Bible uses different Greek words, lēstēs (robber) and kakourgos (criminal) to describe them, so perhaps they are different sets of men. It becomes much more likely that they are two different sets of men when we add the piece of evidence that Matthew says the robbers (lēstēs) reviled Christ but Luke says that only one of the criminals (kakourgos) did.

Matthew 27:44 (ESV) [1]
And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.

Luke 23:39 and 40 (ESV)
(39) One of the criminals who were hanged railed at him, saying, “Are you not the Christ? Save yourself and us!”
(40) But the other rebuked him, saying, “Do you not fear God, since you are under the same sentence of condemnation?

It has sometimes been taught that one of the criminals started to revile Jesus, but then changed his mind and rebuked the other criminal instead. However, the substance of what this criminal said does not support that. The priests, robbers, and one criminal were reviling Jesus because they thought he was a fake, an imposter. They said such things as, “If you are the Son of God, come down from the cross…let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him… let God deliver him now, if he desires him. For he said, ‘I am the Son of God’” (Matt. 27:40-43 ESV abbreviated). It is very unlikely that Jesus could have done anything on the cross that would have totally changed the mind of a criminal who believed he was a fake and get him to believe he was the Promised Messiah instead.

What the criminal said both to the other criminal and to Jesus reflects a deep fear of God and recognition of who Jesus Christ was. This is especially true in light of the fact that a few verses later he asks Jesus to remember him when he comes into his kingdom, and Jesus says the man will be saved, and be in Paradise (Luke 23:42, 43). It is very unlikely he recognized who Jesus was while hanging in pain on the cross, and much more likely that he always had some fear of God and some knowledge of who Jesus was. Thus, there now seems to be quite clear evidence that the two “robbers” are not the same men as the two “criminals.”

Another very important and powerful piece of evidence that leads to the conclusion that the robbers and criminals are not the same men is that they were not crucified at the same time. A careful reading of the biblical text shows that the two criminals were crucified at the same time Jesus was, but the two robbers were crucified later in the day. The criminals were led away to be crucified with Jesus, and were immediately crucified next to him.

Luke 23:32 and 33 (ESV)
(32) Two others, who were criminals, were led away to be put to death with him.
(33) And when they came to the place that is called The Skull, there they crucified him, and the criminals, one on his right and one on his left.

In contrast to these two criminals who Luke says were crucified with Jesus, Matthew 27 says the two robbers were crucified after Jesus had been crucified and the guards had divided his garments by casting lots and had sat down to keep watch over him. This would have taken some time, and the soldiers would not have done those things if they had other men waiting there to be crucified. Note the flow of events as told by Matthew:

Matthew 27:35–38 (ESV)
(35) And when they had crucified him, they divided his garments among them by casting lots.
(36) Then they sat down and kept watch over him there.
(37) And over his head they put the charge against him, which read, “This is Jesus, the King of the Jews.”
(38) Then two robbers were crucified with him, one on the right and one on the left.

The word “then,” which starts verse 38, is very important. It was after the soldiers divided Jesus’ garments and watched him for awhile that the two robbers were crucified. Had Matthew wanted to communicate that the robbers were crucified at the same time Jesus was, he would have used the word “and,” not the word “then.”

What we have seen so far is that the gospel of Luke tells us that two criminals (kakourgos) were led with Jesus when he was led forth to be crucified. Matthew and Mark stated that there were two robbers (lēstēs) crucified with Jesus after the garments had been parted and the soldiers had sat down and watched, or guarded, him. Matthew and Mark record that both “robbers” reviled Christ, while Luke tells us that one criminal reviled Christ while the other rebuked the criminal and asked Christ to remember him.

It seems that from reading Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and by using the principle of narrative development, we can conclude that there were four other men, not just two other men, who were crucified with Jesus. Now we turn our attention to the gospel of John. John seems to be less interested in the timing of the flow of the events, and more concerned with the “where” of the crucifixion, because John 19:18 opens with the word “there” (which is even better translated “where,” as in the KJV). Thus, rather than recount the flow of events as they happen, John gives us more of a “summary statement” of the situation.

John 19:17 and 18 (ESV)
(17) and he went out, bearing his own cross, to the place called The Place of a Skull, which in Aramaic is called Golgotha.
(18) There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them.

Whoa! If John 19:18 is accurate in the ESV, then we must be wrong about there being four others crucified with Jesus, because it clearly says there were two others with him, one on each side. When we come to a situation where there seems to be a problem that we cannot resolve in the English, we must check the Greek text to see if the translation is correct. If you have a Greek text available, or it you have a Greek Interlinear translation available, you can check the Greek for yourself. What we find is that there is no word “one” in the Greek text. It simply reads:

kai meta autos allos duo enteuthen kai enteuthen mesos de ho Iēsous
and with him others two on this side and on that side middle but the Jesus.


The Greek word order is slightly different that the English word order, so we could literally translate that as: “and with him two others on this side and on that side, but Jesus in the middle.” This would make it clear that there were two others “on this side” and two others “on that side.” However, the phrase enteuthen kai enteuthen is somewhat idiomatic and is perhaps better translated into English as “on either side.” It is helpful to know that the phrase enteuthen kai enteuthen appears one other time in the Bible, in Revelation 22:2, which is referring to the tree of life growing “on either side” of the River of Life. If John 19:18 was translated the same way as Revelation 22:2, but with the recognition that duo, “two,” immediately precedes enteuthen kai enteuthen , we would have, “two on either side.” Actually, the ESV version would be very accurate if the commas, which are not in the Greek text but were added by translators, and the word “one,” which was also added, were omitted. It would read, “There they crucified him and with him two others on either side and Jesus between them.” This is the simple truth of Scripture. There were four others crucified with Jesus, as John says, two others on either side.

The fact that almost every modern version of the Bible adds the word “one” to John 19:18 when it is not in any known Greek text is a testimony to the power of tradition. The tradition that there were only two men crucified with Christ leads translators to support that tradition even though the textual evidence is against it. Interestingly, Young’s Literal Translation is one of the few English translations that does not add the word “one,” and without punctuation it reads: “where they crucified him and with him two others on this side and on that side and Jesus in the midst.” [2]

There is another piece of very solid evidence that there were four others crucified with Jesus, not just two, and is has to do with the soldiers breaking the legs of the men who were crucified.

John 19:32 and 33 (ESV)
(32) So the soldiers came and broke the legs of the first, and of the other who had been crucified with him.
(33) But when they came to Jesus and saw that he was already dead, they did not break his legs.

John 19:32 and 33 do not make any sense if there were only two men crucified with Jesus. If that were the case, the soldiers would break the legs of the first man, and then come to Jesus. But that is not what these verses say. If we can get a mental picture of the five men being crucified, here is what we would see: Jesus would be in the middle, and next to him on both sides would be the robbers, who were crucified at the same time he was. Then, on the outside of the robbers and further from Jesus would be the two criminals. If we read the verses with that picture in mind, they fit perfectly. The soldiers were commanded to break the legs of those who were being crucified so they would die faster. Naturally, they started on the outside and then went down the line. They broke the legs of “the first,” that is, the first man they came to. Then they broke the legs of the next man, “who had been crucified with him.” That is exactly correct! The robber next to Jesus had indeed been crucified with him, while the criminal, the first man to get his legs broken, had been crucified much later. Then, when the soldiers “came to” the third man in line, which was Jesus, they found him already dead. Jesus was the focal person, so there was no need for John to say that the soldiers then went around Jesus and broke the legs of the other two men.

Here is a graphical representation of the five crosses that will help us replace the traditional mind picture with the biblical one:



It is significant that the soldiers did not break Jesus’ legs just to “make sure” he was dead. The Bible prophesied that none of the bones of the Savior would be broken. The Passover lamb was not to have any broken bones, and Jesus was the Passover lamb that year (Exod. 12:46; Num. 9:12; Ps. 34:20).

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: