Jesus, remember me when You come in Your kingdom! (Luke 23:42). 

This is a remarkable request by one of the criminals, for in Matthew 27:44 we are told that both criminals heaped insults on Him. In the course of the hours they hung on the cross, it appears that one of these criminals experienced a transformation of heart.

Both of them seemed to have understood Jesus' claim, for even the one that continued to mock Him at least recognized Him as "the Christ" (Luke 23:39). Yet, the other went from mocking Him to sympathizing with Him (Luke 23:40-41) to finally hoping for salvation in Him (Luke 23:42). 

One of the criminals continued to assert his defiance and dignity, even as he was dying. The other, recognizing his hopeless estate, saw in Jesus something superhuman. Perhaps he saw the peace in Jesus' face. Perhaps through the shouts of mockery from the religious leaders and crowds below, he overheard Jesus' words, "Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing" (Luke 23:34). Perhaps he clung to the possibiity expressed even in the mocking words, "He saved others; let Him save Himself" (Luke 23;35). I can imagine this criminal thinking, "Yes! He saved others! Perhaps he can save me too!" To a man whose life was ebbing away, what else was there for him to cling to but this one hope?

What greater answer and encouragement of this hope could there have been than what Jesus said to him: "Truly I say to you, today you shall be with Me in Paradise" (Luke 23:43). Every word of Jesus' response bursts with hope!

• "Truly" - Most assuredly! You can bet your life on it! With absolute certainty!
• "Today" - Not in some abstract age. Not in the distant future. Not even tomorrow. This very day!
• "You shall be with Me" - Not alone. Not with other criminals. With Jesus, the Christ (Messiah), "the King of the Jews."
• "In Paradise" - Not in hell. Not in the grave. Not in some undefined place. He would be in the place, where every hope and dream is fulfilled. Paradise!

I can imagine, as this criminal's physical strength and breath and life were ebbing away, his spirit being suddenly supercharged with tremendous expectation, with the life-giving energy arising from a new connection to the resurrection power of Christ, and with a hope that let's go of any self-reliance and leans wholly on the promise in Jesus.

Friends, today, let us lean once again on the mighty arm of Jesus, who is able to save us completely from all our sins, from all our fears and all from our failures and carry us in Himself to a sure hope, a most excellent destiny and a perpetual rejoicing in the Lord!

But these words appeared to them as nonsense, and they would not believe them (Luke 24:11).

The women tell the apostles that Jesus has risen from the dead, but the apostles think that it is all nonsense. I find this remarkable.

These were not ordinary men, who heard the women's witness. These were not even some of the hundreds of disciples that followed Him. These were the chosen eleven apostles (Judas Iscariot being excluded). Jesus told them no less than three times that He would be crucified and on the third day rise again (cf. Luke 9:21-22; Mark 9:30-32; Luke 18:31-33). Yet, here they refuse to believe the testimony of these women, who simply validated what Jesus predicted would happen. 

These apostles would not believe until they themselves physically saw Jesus. And truly these apostles would not believe until Jesus opened their minds to understand that the Scriptures were being fulfilled in Him:

Now He said to them, “These are My words which I spoke to you while I was still with you, that all things which are written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then He opened their minds to understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:44-45).

I've made this point in a previous post, but it bears repeating. It is arrogance to think that anyone can be saved apart from God's enablement. If the apostles, who walked with Jesus for three years and who saw all His miracles and heard His words first-hand, did not believe apart from Jesus opening their minds to understand, what makes us think that we are better than they?

No, my friends. Unless God opens our minds and gives us "ears to hear," we too would disbelieve. It is by the Lord's decree that we have a kind of hearing that also believes. Paul wrote in Romans 10 that the Jews heard the Gospel but still did not believe. The reason for this was not that the Jews did not hear the Gospel. They heard, but they did not have the kind of hearing that led to faith. Where did such hearing come from? Paul declared that such hearing faith could only come by the decree of God:

So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word [Gk rhema, spoken decree or command] of God (Romans 10:17).

The Quest Bible has this note about the difference between the Greek words logos and rhema, which are both translated "Word" in the Bible:

There are two primary Greek words that describe Scripture which are translated “word” in the New Testament. The first,logos, refers principally to the total inspired Word of God and to Jesus, who is the living Word. Logos is found in John 1:1; Luke 8:11; Philippians 2:16; Hebrews 4:12; and other verses. The second Greek word translated “word” is rhema, which refers to the spoken word. Rhema literally means an utterance(individually, collectively or specifically). Examples are found inLuke 1:38; 3:2; 5:5; and Acts 11:16. (Read more:http://www.gotquestions.org/rhema-word.html#ixzz3IrJoL0rK)

Notice that rhema is used in Romans 10:17. Paul was not saying that people believe simply by hearing God's written Word or by hearing the message of Christ. If he wanted to say this, logos would have been a better term to use. No, I believe Paul deliberately used rhema, which emphasizes God's spoken decree, to suggest that God must first decree, ordain, enable the hearing for the hearing to become faith. So, also Jesus taught, "Unless a man is born again (by the Spirit), he cannot see [perceive] the kingdom of God (cf. John 3:3). In fact, no one can accept or understand spiritual truth, such as the Gospel, apart from the Spirit's enablement (cf. 1 Corinthians 2:14).

Friends, let us not think too highly of ourselves, imagining that our "free will" choice to believe in Jesus provides the great divide between our eternal salvation and the eternal condemnation of unbelievers. No, it is not our free willing but God's calling and election, which has saved us. Christ died for all, but God has only enabled faith in some. Rather than question God's wisdom in saving us in this way, and rather than trying to invent something to give humanity greater "dignity", let us simply praise Him for enabling us to choose Him; which is to say, we did not choose Him, but He chose us.

[j] But Jesus was saying, “Father, forgive them; for they do not know what they are doing.” And they cast lots, dividing up His garments among themselves (Luke 23:34).

One of the most familiar quotations from Jesus on the cross is the one where He asks the Father to forgive the perpetrators of His crucifixion. As beloved as this quotation is, it must be noted that it was not present in the oldest and best manuscripts of the Greek New Testament (thus the endnote [j] above reads "Some early mss do not contain But Jesus was saying...doing").

In fact, the strongest evidence for its existence may be an early attempt at a harmony of the Gospels by Tatian in his seminal work The Diatessaron (c. A.D. 170 - see quote here in LII-6). Tatian was known to have been a disciple of Justin Martyr, an early church father. Tatian's harmony was widely used in the Syrian churches; however, among the Greeks, he was increasingly seen as a heretic, Encratite (ascetic), and Gnostic. The work itself provides an amazing early witness to the gospels. However, as we do not have the original of The Diatessaron, it is highly likely that scribes and editors over the years modified the work to more closely match the four canonical gospels (cf. collection of scholarship on the study of The Diatessaron here). This, of course, makes this work somewhat suspect as a witness to the gospels. 

It is noteworthy that one of the greatest Greek scholars of our time, Bruce Metzger, has called into serious question the inclusion of this text in the original text of Luke. He, nevertheless, treats it as an early addition to the gospel:

23:34 omit verse 34a [[‘ο δε Ιησους ελεγεν, Πατερ αφες αυτοις ου γαρ οιδασιν τι ποιουσιν.]] {A}

The absence of these words from early and diverse witnesses as P⁷⁵ B D* W Θ it^{a, d} syr^s cop^{sa, bo mss} al is most impressive and can scarcely be explained as a deliberate excision by copyists who, considering the fall of Jerusalem to be proof that God had not forgiven the Jews, could not allow it to appear that the prayer of Jesus had remained unanswered. At the same time, the logion, though probably not a part of the original Gospel of Luke, bears self-evident tokens of its dominical origin, and was retained, within double square brackets, in its traditional place where it had been incorporated by unknown copyists relatively early in the transmission of the Third Gospel. (Metzger, A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament Second Edition A Companion Volume to the United Bible Societies’ Greek New Testament Fourth Revised Edition, p. 154; bold emphasis ours)

According to the UBS, the double brackets surrounding the Greek text imply that the

"enclosed passages, which are usually rather extensive, are known not to be part of the original text, but an addition at a very early stage of the tradition. They are included with the text in this way because of their antiquity and the position they have traditionally enjoyed in the church (e.g., Jn 7.53-8.11)." (UBS’ Greek New Testament Fourth Revised Edition, p. 2; bold emphasis ours)

So, at least some of the best Greek scholarship seems opposed to seeing the words of Jesus as being part of the orginal text of Luke's Gospel.

At the same time, the arguments in favor of its inclusion are also persuasive, based on the evidence of the church fathers, on the basis of arguments of why the text may have been excluded for theological reasons, as well as the text's strong internal consistency with Lukan style and content (Read a supportive technical article here; see also a more abbreviated support by a pastor here).

Thus, there is some cause to question the authenticity of this saying by Jesus on the cross. Let it suffice to warn that no major doctrine (e.g. a doctrine on forgiveness) should be based on this quotation alone. 

Friends, I include this somewhat technical comment on a portion of Scripture to highlight the importance of the discipline of textual criticism with respect to the Scriptures. While we believe that the original text (aka autographa) of the Bible was completely inerrant, we don't make such absolute claims about the copies we have, and certainly not about any translation (e.g. NIV, KJV, ESV, etc.) from these extant copies. The fact that we have so many and such ancient copies makes the text of our current versions/translations highly reliable, but not perfect. 

Therefore, when we encounter a footnote in our Bibles indicating that a verse or portion of text is not found in the oldest and best manuscripts, we should take note and be careful not to base any major teaching on it. While we do not need to ignore it altogether, for there was enough of a witness to make it into our Bibles, we probably ought not to preach a sermon with such a text as our central text.

And they began to accuse him, saying, “We have found this man subverting our nation. He opposes payment of taxes to Caesar and claims to be Messiah, a king" (Luke 23:2).

But they insisted, “He stirs up the people all over Judea by his teaching. He started in Galilee and has come all the way here" (Luke 23:5).

Pilate called together the chief priests, the rulers and the people, and said to them, “You brought me this man as one who was inciting the people to rebellion. I have examined him in your presence and have found no basis for your charges against him (Luke 23:13-14).

Notice the charge against Jesus was that He was inciting a rebellion against Caesar. This would be the basis for the religious leaders to crucify Jesus. Yet, the rulers could not prove this charge. 

I believe this is the reason why Jesus repeatedly told those that He healed not to spread the news. This is also why He went out to the desert areas, where there were no large population centers. This is why He frequently went off into the mountains by Himself. Jesus did everything He could to avoid even the appearance of leading a rebellion. He would not give the religious and secular leaders any just reason for His crucifixion. 

--------------

Then he opened their minds so they could understand the Scriptures (Luke 24:45).

Would the disciples have understood the Gospel if Jesus had not opened their minds? No. Can we understand and believe the Gospel if God does not open our minds? No. This is why the Bible says,

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit (1 Corinthians 2:14).

How then can anyone claim that they understood the Gospel and accepted Jesus by their own free will? At the very least they must admit that God helped them to understand and believe. It is in keeping with human free will that people are justly condemned for their sinful rebellion against God. And it is in keeping with God's grace in election that people are saved. Thus, there is no contradiction between human responsibility and God's sovereignty when properly understood.