Baptism and the thief on the cross

Hebrew 9:15-17 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Baptist preacher David Kingdon (1934–2021) makes an argument against the Campbellite position that the thief on the cross was saved under the Old Covenant. Regardless of what you think of the argument by Kingdon and the response by Allen, Kingdom clearly made Jimmy Allen shift from forcefully identifying the time of the death of Jesus to that of the time of probating the will (which he claimed happened on Pentecost). So much for being silent where the Bible is silent (for in the context of Hebrews, it is the offering of his blood that seals the new testament, 9:23-28, rather than the outpouring of the Spirit on Pentecost).

David Kingdon: “The argument of our friends is that the thief on the cross was not saved under the New Covenant because the New Covenant was not yet in force, on the basis of Hebrews chapter 9, namely that the Covenant or Testament comes into force on the death of the testator – in this case Jesus Christ. So he’d not yet died; therefore, the thief on the cross was not saved under the New Covenant. Right?”

Jimmy Allen: “That’s correct.

David Kingdon: “Well, now could I ask you the question, ‘who died first, the thief or the Lord Jesus Christ?’”

See John 19:31-33.

This is a 60-second loop clip, but you should be able to shift from it to the entire video by selecting watch full video.