"Contradictions" in the New Testament ?

• A popular criticism made to the Bible is that it contains many contradictions....

• Contradiction Example 1:

  Luke 18:35-19:1 reported that Jesus went into Jericho when He health one blind man:

  Luk 18:35 -- And as He came near Jericho, it happened that a certain blind man sat by the roadside begging.... Luk 19:1 -- And going in, He passed through Jericho.

  But Matthew 20:29-30 said that Jesus went out of Jericho, furthermore, there were two blind men:

  Mat 20:29 -- And as they departed from Jericho, a great crowd followed Him. And behold, two blind men were sitting by the wayside. When they heard that Jesus passed by, they cried out, saying, Have mercy on us, O Lord, Son of David!

• Contradiction Example 2:

  For this, you need to look at the King James Version of the New Testament

  In Acts 9:7, Luke reports that the men who were traveling with Paul did hear a voice:

  Act 9:7 -- And the men who journeyed with him (Paul) stood speechless, indeed hearing a voice but seeing no one.

  But in Acts 22:9 - by the same author no less - it is reported that the men who were traveling with Paul did NOT hear a voice:

  Act 22:9 -- And they who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid. But they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.

• Indeed, such "contradictions" have led the "less educated Christians" away from Christianity: --- click here

  His preacher described the young man as a "solid Christian". He was a devout follower of Christ who was enthusiastic about living for Jesus. From the time he was a young boy, his grandmother had taken him to worship God on the first day of every week. After becoming a Christian, he had, according to his preacher, "attended every service of the church." He grew in the faith, and began taking part in leading the congregation in prayer. Later, he personally taught the congregation by occasionally standing before the church and reading the Bible to them aloud, at times even delivering short talks. Before departing for the university (about an hour away from his home town), the young 18-year-old from West Virginia was considered by those who knew him best as a dedicated Christian with impressive potential "one whose shield of faith would stand strong when worldliness attacked, and whose foundation would remain firm when shaken by the devil's doctrines". Sadly, only a short time passed before this young man lost his faith. He went to college as a believer in the God of the Bible, and came home an "enlightened" skeptic. One of the first classes he took at the university was an elective course on world religions. Initially, he thought he could handle whatever questions came his way about Christianity. He had memorized numerous verses in the Bible. He knew all about the uniqueness of the church. He even could tell people what to do in order to have their sins forgiven. It took, however, little time for one teacher in one class in one university to turn this "solid Christian" into an unbeliever.... And the reason why this young man lost his faith was: When asked to explain to his teacher and fellow classmates how hundreds of "Bible contradictions" are not contradictions at all, but simply misunderstandings on man's part, he would not...because he could not. (See entire article: click here )

The law of non-contradiction, which is the basis of all logical thinking, states that a thing cannot be both A and non-A at the same time, in the same place, and in the same manner.

For example: It cannot be both raining and not raining at the same time in the same location.

• It is important to remember that two statements can differ from each other without being contradictory.

  Some people fail to make a distinction between contradiction and difference.

• Example 1: The case of the blind men at Jericho.
  • Matthew relates how two blind men met Jesus, while both Mark and Luke mention only one.

  • Now: neither of these statements denies (i.e., contradicts) the other --- Rather they are complementary.

• Clarification:
  Suppose you talk to the mayor of your city and the chief of police at city hall.

  Later, you see your friend, Jim, and tell him you talked to the mayor today.

  An hour after that, you see another friend, John, and tell him you talked to both the mayor and the chief of police.

  Suppose your friends compare notes, and there seems to be a contradiction but there is not !!!

  Since you had not told Jim you talked only to the mayor, you did not contradict what you told John.

  The statements you made to Jim and John were different, not contradictory - but complementary.

  Many biblical statements (and news bulletins) fall into this category, and people sometimes think they find errors in passages when actually they simply do not read the passages correctly.

• Differences in accounts that are not contradictory

• Author's perspective

• Unclear (poor) translation from Hebrew or Greek into English (or some other language)

• Difference of language usages in Jesus' days

• Copy errors

1. Are there one and two blind men ?

   See Luke 18:35-19:1 and Matthew 20:29-30 (explained above)

2. The resurrection accounts in the 4 gospels tell of "different groups" of people were at the empty tomb:
   • Mat 28:1 -- But late in the week, at the dawning into the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary came to see the tomb.
   • Mar 16:1 -- And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene and Mary, the mother of James (who is also the mother of Jesus) and Salome, had bought sweet spices so that they might come and anoint Him.
   • Luk 24:10 -- It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James, and the rest with them, who told these things to the apostles.
   • Joh 20:1 -- The first of the sabbaths Mary Magdalene came early to the tomb, darkness still being on it, and she saw the stone taken away from the tomb.

3. Did Peter denied Jesus after the rooster crows once or twice ?
   • Matthew, Luke and John said that Peter denied Jesus after the rooster crows:
     • Matthew 26:34 - Jesus said to him, �Assuredly, I say to you that this night, before the rooster crows, you will deny Me three times�
     • Luke 22:34 - Then He said, �I tell you, Peter, the rooster shall not crow this day before you will deny three times that you know Me� .
     • John 13:38 - Jesus answered him� �Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times� .

   • Mark said it happens after Peter denied Jesus twice:
     • Mark 14:30 - "Assuredly, I say to you that today, even this night, before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times"

   Matthew, Luke and John did not say only once ! So Matthew, Luke and John did not contradict Mark.

1. Was Jesus walking into and away from Jericho when he healed the blind men ?
   • Luke 18:35-19:1 reported that Jesus went into Jericho and
   • Matthew 20:29-30 said that Jesus went out of Jericho.

   Cities in the ancient days are often destroyed by wars and re-established in a different location - near a water supply, or a new road....

   Jericho, for example, was in at least 4 different locations (see Case for Christ, pp 98).

   Luke and Matthew used different locations of Jericho in their narratives !!!

   See also: click here

2. Did Judas die by hanging himself or by falling apart ???
   • Mat 27:5 -- And he (Judas) threw the pieces of silver down in the temple and departed. And he (Judas) went and hanged himself.

   • Act 1:18 Indeed, then, this one (Judas) purchased a field with the reward of unrighteousness. And falling headlong, he burst apart in the middle, and all his bowels gushed out.

   Notice that Matthew does not say that Judas did not fall; neither does Acts say that Judas did not hang himself. This is not a matter of one person calling something black and the other person calling it white. Both accounts can be true and supplementary.

   A possible reconstruction would be this: Judas hanged himself on a tree on the edge of a precipice that overlooked the valley of Hinnom. After he hung there for a time, the limb of the tree snapped or the rope gave way and Judas fell down the ledge, mangling his body in the process.

3. How can Jesus be on trial when he was already crucified ?

   Mark said that Jesus was crucified at the 3rd hour:

   • Mark 15:25 -- And it was the third hour, and they crucified Him.

   But John said Jesus is still on trial at around the 6th hour:

   • John 19:14 -- And it was the preparation of the Passover, and about the sixth hour. And he (Pilate) said to the Jews, Behold your king! But they cried out, Away with him! Away with him! Crucify him!

   For this to happen, Jesus must be brought down from the cross and stand trial again.... so did Mark or John got the time wrong ????????

   Nope, the explanation is quite simple:

   Jews reckon the day starting at sun rise (6 AM begin of the day). Mark was writing from the Jewish perspective, and his 3rd hour is 9 AM in the morning

   Romans (after Julius Caesar changed the calendar into a solar calendar) reckon the day starting at midnight. John wrote his gospel much later (we have documentation on that) - when he was residing in Ephasus, which is a major Roman city. He wrote his Gospel using Roman time reckoning and his 6th hour is 6 AM in the morning

   So: Jesus was tried at around 6 AM in the morning (John 19:14) and was crucified later at 9 AM (Mark 15:25) - no contradiction.

   See also: click here

   ---

   ---

   A very lamentable website:

   While I was doing searching on the Internet, I found the following webpage discussing the same discrepancy of time: click here (if page is moved, I have saved a local copy: click here ).

   I am very much sadden that someone with a PhD education in Biblical Studies does not know how to explain the time "discrepancy" in the different Gospels. The author basically caved in and offered a excuse for an "error" in the Gospel. I quote:

   "All this suggests that the purpose and organizing principle behind the Gospels is not historical and chronological but theological."

   The excuse that this author is making implies that the Gospel does not have a historical basis and we should take the writings as a theological doctrine. Sure, there is a theological message in the Gospels; so do many other books - every world religion has one. But what is special about the Christian message is that it is rooted in historical facts. I strongly disagree with the excuse offered by author of the above webpage - I found that the authors of the Gospels intended to write chronological history and that the Gospels intended to give us evidence that Jesus did live and walk among us. And the only way that the Gospels can do that is by being historically truthful documents - and I believe that the Gospels writers were very careful in recording everything as accurately as they can.

   Furthermore, I seriously believe that the webpage above is very harmful to the Christian cause - it can even make unbelievers out of some weaker Christians who has some doubts about the historicity of Jesus.

4. Who was the father of Joseph ???

   Matthew and Luke both describe the lineage of Jesus to David and they hopelessly disagree with each other:

   According to Matthew:

   Mat 1:13-16 ---- And Zerubbabel fathered Abiud, and Abiud fathered Eliakim, and Eliakim fathered Azor. And Azor fathered Sadoc, and Sadoc fathered Achim, and Achim fathered Eliud. And Eliud fathered Eleazar, and Eleazar fathered Matthan, and Matthan fathered Jacob. And Jacob fathered Joseph, the husband to be of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ.

   But according to Luke:

   Luk 3:23-26 --- And Jesus Himself was beginning to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) son of Joseph, son of of Heli, son of of Matthat, son of of Levi, son of of Melchi, son of of Janna, son of of Joseph, son of of Mattathias, son of of Amos, son of of Nahum, son of of Esli, son of of Naggai, son of of Maath, son of of Mattathias, son of of Semei, son of of Joseph, son of of Juda,

   Matthew was following the male line: Jesus was the son of Joseph, Joseph was the son of Jacob, etc

   Luke was following the female line (Mary), but mentioned the husband of Mary: Jesus' was (as was supposed) son of Joseph, Joseph was the son-in-law of Heli, Heli was the son of Matthat, and so on...

   Evidence that Luke was tracing the female side (Mary) is his use of "the" in every name, except for Joseph. This is not evident in an English translation, you need the original Greek version (Goto www.e-sword.net and download the e-sword software along with the Greek bible and see for yourself)

   We also have evidence that Mary was the daughter of Heli in the Talmud: click here

   Reference: click here

   ---

   ---

   PS: I personally believe that Luke had spoken with Mary in person - there is no way that Luke can know so many details about Jesus' early years otherwise. I think Mary spilled her heart out to Luke about the time how Simeon and Anna predicted her suffering and how it all have come true. Most notably, Luke writes:

   Luke 2:51 --- But his mother treasured all these things in her heart

   This statement sounds to me like Luke had interviewed Mary and she spilled her heart out to Luke in person.

1. Did or did not the men that accompany Paul hear a voice ?

   In Acts 9:7, Luke reports that the men who were traveling with Paul did hear a voice:

   Act 9:7 -- And the men who journeyed with him (Paul) stood speechless, indeed hearing a voice but seeing no one.

   But in Acts 22:9 - by the same author no less - it is reported that the men who were traveling with Paul did NOT hear a voice:

   Act 22:9 -- And they who were with me indeed saw the light and were afraid. But they did not hear the voice of Him who spoke to me.

   This example is a classic case of poor translation.... The Greek scholar, W. F. Arndt, explains:

   The construction of the verb "to hear" (akouo) is not the same in both accounts.

   In Acts 9:7 it is used with the genitive, expressing that something is being heard or that certain sounds reach the ear; without indicating as to whether a person understands what he hears or not.

   On the other hand, in Acts 22:9, the verb "to hear" (akouo) is used with the accusative, which describes a hearing which includes mental apprehension of the message spoken. (In other words: understand what was said).

   From this it becomes evident that the two passages are not contradictory: Acts 22:9 does not deny that the associates of Paul heard certain sounds; it simply declares that they did not hear in such a way as to understand what was being said.

2. Called a Nazarene ???
   • One of the more problematic verses in Matthew is:
     Matthew 2:23 --- "And he came and dwelt in a city called Nazareth; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets: He shall be called a Nazarene"

     The problem was: No prophet ever predicted that Jesus was gonna be called "Nazarene"

     (You can try to search the whole Bible, I can assure you that you cannot find this prediction).

   • The word "notsri" is the adjective of the noun "netser" which mean sprout, or branch or offshoot

     Jesus was widely known to the Israelite as "Yeshu haNotsri" in their language.

     The word "Nazarene" is the Greek form of "Notsri". So Jesus "Nazarene" is Jesus the Branch. The Messiah is often referred to as the Branch by the Prophets !!!

   • References:
     • click here
     • click here

1. Did Jesus really stay three days and three nights in the tomb?
   • Jesus was died on Friday afternoon, and was risen on Sunday morning.

     How could Jesus have remained in the tomb three days and three nights if He was crucified on Friday and rose on Sunday???

   • To understand this, you need historical background:
     The Jewish writers have recorded in the commentaries on the Scriptures the principle governing the reckoning of time. Any part of a period was considered a full period. So: Any part of a day was reckoned as a complete day.

     The Babylonian Talmud (Jewish commentaries) relates that, "The portion of a day is as the whole of it."

     The Jerusalem Talmud says, "We have a teaching, 'A day and a night are an Onah and the portion of an Onah is as the whole of it.'" ( An Onah simply means, "a period of time.)

     More specifically: Rabbi Eliezar Ben Azariah said, "A day and a night make an Onah, and a part of an Onah is as a whole." And a little after, R. Ismael computeth a part of the Onah for the whole. (p. 210, vol. 2, Commentary on the New Testament from the Talmud and Hebraica)

1. Was Jehoiachin 8 or 18 yrs old when he was king ?
   2Ch 36:9 --- Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign, and he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem. And he did the evil in the sight of Jehovah.
   2Ki 24:8 --- Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother's name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

   From other passage of the Old Testament, it can refered that Jehoiachin was 18 yr old when he became king. One of the copiest had a bad day when he was copying 2 Chronicle....

2. Did David or Elhanan kill Goliath ?

   We all have read the story of David on how he killed Goliath. But if you read 2Samuel 21:19, you will see that someone else killed Goliath:

   2 Samuel 21:19 ---- And there was again a battle with the Philistines in Gob, where Elhanan of Bethlehem, the son of Jaare-oregim, killed one of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver's beam.

   This error is very subtle and fortunately, we have 1 Chronicle 20:5 to help us find the copy error:

   1Ch 20:5 --- And there was war again with the Philistines. And Elhanan the son of Jair killed Lahmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite, whose spear was like a weavers' beam.

   In Hebrew: "eth Lachmi" means "Lachmi the brother of". Apparently, either some sloppy scribe has changed "eth Lachmi" into "beith hallachmi" meaning Bethlehemite, someone from Bethlehem (remember, there are no vowels in ancient Hebrew). It could also be some copy has become very old and dirty so that it is very hard to read (there is no printing press in the ancient days) and the copist had to "guess" what was written and goofed.

   Reference: Who Killed Goliath ?

NOTE: I am not a purist that claim that the Bible is without any errors. I think the authors/copists did exercise super-human care in preserving the accuracy - the historical content has been preserved very reliably. However, they are still humans and are fallible - copy errors do exist but these do not compromise the essence of truth of the scriptures.

• A list of alleged discrepancies and their explanation (www.apologeticspress.org): click here
• The Myth of Factual Bible Contradictions: click here
• A chapter in "A Ready Defense" by Josh McDowell: click here
• 101 contradictions cleared: click here
• The reality of copyist errors: click here