Matthew and Mark say that both robbers were insulting Jesus, while Luke's account seems to say that only one of the robbers insulted Jesus. I'm not sure how others would handle this (hence this thread). However, I have a thought that at least makes sense to me. One of the main purposes of Luke's account is to get the point across that God's grace is sufficient to save inspite of all we have done. At even our last moments, when good works are not do-able, God's grace can save completely and mightily from the worst of sins. Wouldn't this point be even more amplified if the one being saved was insulting Christ even up to the very point of being regenerated? I believe that as he was coming to grips with his oncoming death, God showed the robber that he shouldn't be insulting Christ by telling Him to save them from physical death, but that the robber SHOULD be asking Jesus to save him from eternal death. Therefore, both accounts happened. Let me know what you think.