How many were crucified with Yeshua?

Bob Dobbalina

Active member
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
 
1) The Bible does not say there was only three crosses; there could have been four, five, six, or more.
2) The Bible focuses on the two thieves/malefactors, one on each side of Jesus.
 
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
That would be an interesting read.
 
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
It has crossed my mind also that we only assume there were just those on each side of him, but there could have been more. Another assumption is that the thief that spoke to Christ to remember him when He came into His Kingdom was not baptized, so how did he even know that unless he was already a baptized believer, and this arrest could have been from something he did before becoming a Christian. Christ was about to die, and yet this thief believed MORE than even the 11 disciples. That could only be from the Spirit. The disciples believed this was the end to His ruling in a Kingdom, and didn't believe Mary at first when she told them He had risen, especially Thomas.
 
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
Sounds like the foolishness from Dr. Victor Wierwille who ran "The WAY International" in New Knoxville, Ohio for years. His "logic" was, "They came and broke the legs of two thieves, and THEN came to Jesus who was in the middle, so "there were apparently two more were on the other side of Him".

Since "the WAY" taught that what you did in the FLESH didn't effect the condition of your spirit, you didn't want to do business with "Way" folks - But they DID know how to party.
 
Another assumption is that the thief that spoke to Christ to remember him when He came into His Kingdom was not baptized, so how did he even know that unless he was already a baptized believer, and this arrest could have been from something he did before becoming a Christian.

Christ taught publicly so his teachings were known to many who were not his followers.

So also the chief priests, with the scribes and elders, mocked him, saying, “He saved others; he cannot save himself. He is the King of Israel; let him come down now from the cross, and we will believe in him. He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he desires him. For he said, ‘I am the Son of God.’” And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way.
Matthew 27:41-44 ESV

This proves that he was not a believer when he was crucified but became one while he was on the cross.
 
Matthew 27:37 - KJV
Then were there two thieves crucified with him, one on the right hand, and another on the left.
Here we know there “were there two thieves crucified with him”. It is worth noting that this is set up as “were there two crucified with him” as opposed to “crucified with him, there were two thieves”. The former reading as a concise list while the later reading as a reference of subset. The old English has a peculiar precision in its grammar that I find useful.

However, there is no mention of the existence of any more or any mention of the non-existence of others, or total, crucified. So we move to the other gospels to find our other witnesses.

Luke 23:33 - KJV
And when they were come to the place, which is called Calvary, there they crucified him, and the malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other on the left.
Here we have a list of “the malefactors”: notice there are only two and clearly mentioned on which sides of Christ they are crucified.

Luke 23:39-43 - KJV
(39) And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. (40) But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? (41) And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. (42) And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. (43) And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day shalt thou be with me in paradise.
The phrase “one of the …. but the other” confirms 33 that there were only two malefactors.

Mark 15:27 - KJV
And with him they crucify two thieves; the one on his right hand, and the other on his left.
Here we know there were two thieves: so there are clearly no more thieves. The reading from Luke has a clear count of Malefactors: two.

John 19:32-33 - KJV
(32) Then came the soldiers, and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with him. (33) But when they came to Jesus, and saw that he was dead already, they brake not his legs:
Here we have “the other”, indicating a singular other, and not “the others” (i.e. plural) effectively stating only two total (less Christ which would make three).

Across the four gospels it reads pretty clearly, as I read it anyhow, there were only two others and those were both thieves.

Is there any other possible way to read the above? Or is there reference anywhere else in scripture which would indicate more than two were crucified with Christ?

What I’m curious to know is which of the two thieves actually recognized Christ for who he was and asked to be remembered when Christ enters his kingdom?
 
Last edited:
A case could also be made that Isaiah prophesied of the gospels giving an explicit count of the transgressors which would be with Christ:

Isaiah 52:12 - KJV
and he was numbered with the transgressors;
That count, the number, across the gospels which make at least two witnesses - according to the laws of Moses - is two.

Finally,
John 19:18 - KJV
Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either side one, and Jesus in the midst.


I see no other way to read into these verses more than two being crucified with Christ. If there is another logical deduction which opens the possibility, please post it.
 
Last edited:
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
Being respectful of the OP, I do not know of this argument nor have I heard anyone claiming more than two were crucified. So this is a curious new idea. That said, I did post according to the thread title and provided an answer from scripture to substantiate three total, one of whom was Christ with the other two being Malefactors/Thieves. I hope you find my post without ambiguity; if not let me know and I’ll attempt to clarify.
 
What I’m curious to know is which of the two thieves actually recognized Christ for who he was and asked to be remembered when Christ enters his kingdom?


Got to digging and found the following passages curious due to their proximity references: ie left vs right with the one from Matthew being reminiscent of Christ and the Crucifixion.
Ecclesiastes 10:2 - KJV
A wise man’s heart is at his right hand; but a fool’s heart at his left.


And
Matthew 25:33 - KJV
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Matt. 25:41 - KJV
Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels:

🤔 now this has got me thinking…
 
Matthew 25:33 - KJV
And he shall set the sheep on his right hand, but the goats on the left.

Went back to proverbs and I dare say, much of Solomons texts on the fool fits with the one thief that is not recorded to have repented. Not sure knowing which thief recognized Christ is doctrinally important; just one of those little tid bits of scripture I’ll put in the back of my mind. It may come of value one day elsewhere.
 
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.
you can find a good study at…..”spiritandtruthonline”.

……or google ……..”How many were crucified with Jesus”

I try to never assume the translators were perfect in their own work………
 
I know the mainstream teaching of there being one on each side of our Savior as He was crucified. However, I remember reading some time ago a very intriguing thesis explaining that there were five crosses on that hill.
i can’t remember the author’s name but I found the thesis to be credible and intriguing. My hope is that someone may be familiar with the author and/or the thesis.

I forget who produced the movie, or who directed it, but there was a movie years ago that depicted the crucifixion with Christ on one side, and the two others to his left. The reason being that they were using John's gospel which clearly points out that the guards broke the legs of the other two before coming to Christ.

Here's what you're looking for:

"Mislead by tradition and the ignorance of Scripture on the part of medieval painters, it is the general belief that only two were crucified with the Lord. But Scripture does not say so. It states that there were two "thieves" (Gr. lestai = robbers, Matt. 27:38. Mark 15:27); and that there were two "malefactors" (Gr. kakouryoi, Luke 23:32).
It is also recorded that both the robbers reviled Him (Matt. 27:44. Mark 15:32); while in Luke 23:39 only one of the malefactors "railed on Him", and "the other rebuked him" for so doing (v. 40). If there were only two, this is a real discrepancy; and there is another, for the two malefactors were "led with Him to be put to death" (Luke 23:32), and when they were come to Calvary, "they" then and there "crucified Him and the malefactors, one on the right hand and the other on the left" (v. 33).

But the other discrepancy is according to Matthew, that after the parting of the garments, and after "sitting down they watched Him there", that "THEN" were there two robbers crucified with Him, one on the right hand and the other on the left" (Matt. 27:38. Mark 15:27). The two malefactors had already been "led with Him" and were therefore crucified "with Him", and before the two robbers were brought.

The first two (malefactors) who were "led with Him" were placed one on either side. When the other two (robbers) were brought, much later, they were also similarly placed; so that there were two (one of each) on either side, and the Lord in the midst. The malefactors were therefore the nearer, and being on the inside they could speak to each other better, and the one with the Lord, as recorded (Luke 23:39-43).

John's record confirms this, for he speaks only of place, and not of time. He speaks, generally of the
fact : "where they crucified Him, and with Him others, two on this side, and that side, and Jesus in the midst" (John 19:8). In Rev. 22:2 we have the same expression in the Greek (enteuthen kai enteuthen), which is accurately rendered "on either side". So it should be rendered here: "and with Him others, on either side".

But John further states (19:32, 33) : "then came the soldiers and brake the legs of the first, and of the other which was crucified with Him. But when they came (Gr. = having come) to Jesus, and saw that He was dead already, they brake not His legs." Had there been only two (one on either side) the soldiers would not have come to the Lord, but would have passed Him, and then turned back again. But they came to Him after they had broken the legs of the first two.



There are two words used of the "other" and "others" in John 19:32 and Luke 23:32 (See Ap. 124. 1). In the former passage we read, "they brake the legs of the first and of the other." Here the Greek is allos which is the other (the second) of the two when there are more (see Matt. 10:23; 25:16, 17, 20; 27:61; 28:1. John 18:15, 16; 20:2, 4, 8. and Rev. 17:10).

In the latter passage (Luke 23:32) the word is heteros = different (See Ap. 124. 2) : "and others also, two were being led with Him." These were different (*1) from Him with Whom they were led, not different from one another; for they were "in the same condemnation", and "justly", while He had "done nothing amiss" (vv. 40, 41).

From this evidence, therefore, it is clear that there were four "others" crucified with the Lord; and thus, on the one hand, there are no "discrepancies", as alleged; while, on the other hand, every word and every expression, in the Greek, gets (and gives) its own exact value, and its full significance.

To show that we are not without evidence, even from tradition, we may state that there is a "Calvary" to be seen at Ploubezere near Lannion, in the Cotes-du-Nord, Brittany, known as Les Cinq Croix ("The Five Crosses"). There is a high cross in the center, with four lower ones, two on either side. There may be other instances of which we have not heard.

"In the Roman Catholic church ... the altar slab or "table" alone is consecrated, and in sign of this are cut in its upper surface five Greek crosses, one in the center and one in each corner ... but the history of the origin and development of this practice is not fully worked out" (Encycl. Brit., 11th (Cambridge) ed., vol. i, pp. 762, 763). This practice may possibly be explained by the subject of this Appendix.

(*1) Cp. Matt. 6:21, 24; 8:21; 11:3. Luke 5:7; 6:6; 7:41; 9:56; 14:31; 16:13, 18; 17:34, 35; 18:10; 28:40."

 
Being respectful of the OP, I do not know of this argument nor have I heard anyone claiming more than two were crucified. So this is a curious new idea. That said, I did post according to the thread title and provided an answer from scripture to substantiate three total, one of whom was Christ with the other two being Malefactors/Thieves. I hope you find my post without ambiguity; if not let me know and I’ll attempt to clarify.
You posted this before shnarkle’s post; the last post as of this writing, #15.
I’d like to learn what you make of their post; has it given you reason to reconsider?
 
I forget who produced the movie, or who directed it, but there was a movie years ago that depicted the crucifixion with Christ on one side, and the two others to his left. The reason being that they were using John's gospel which clearly points out that the guards broke the legs of the other two before coming to Christ.

John 19:18 says, "There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them." Apparently two guards were assigned to break the legs and each started on a different side.

At the beginning both criminals joined with the crowd in attacking Jesus but one of them repented and was promised entry into Paradise. Matthew and Luke simply report different parts of this. If you study the Bible carefully you can find explanations for the "contradictions" you find in it.
 
John 19:18 says, "There they crucified him, and with him two others, one on either side, and Jesus between them."
The "one" you have in your citation is nowhere to be found in the Greek manuscripts. It was added by the translators because they felt it made more sense, and it does if one assumes there were only two others crucified.
Apparently
This is an assumption on your part.
If you study the Bible carefully you can find explanations for the "contradictions" you find in it.
Yes, and those explanations are feeble at best.
 
The "one" you have in your citation is nowhere to be found in the Greek manuscripts. It was added by the translators because they felt it made more sense, and it does if one assumes there were only two others crucified.

This is an assumption on your part.

Yes, and those explanations are feeble at best.
This is the main reason I am not willing to trust most translations…..and instead will consult the original languages ………Upon arising questions.

It is very human to think others should have the benefit of your opinion……….
 
Finis Dake of the Dake Bible speculated there were more than two people crucified with Jesus. His notes are in the Matthew account.
 
Back
Top