Understanding Apparent Contradictions in the Bible

I. Understanding Inspiration (what's at stake)

◦ Our faith in not, in fact, dependent on the perfection of the Bible, but rather
on Jesus deity, death, and the historicity of His resurrection

◦ John 5:36-40
▪ The purpose of Scripture is to point to Jesus

▪ Scripture alone does not produce salvation

▪ Jesus, not Scripture, is the ultimate authority

◦ Hebrews 1:1-2
▪ There are many methods God used to inspire the Scriptures

▪ The revelation in the person of Jesus is superior to previous revelation

◦ 2 Peter 1:21 (compare Numbers 24:2)

▪ God works through man to produce Scripture; he does not dictate or turn
the man into a writing machine

▪ Prophecy is singled out, indicating other Scripture is inspired in a less

direct manner

◦ 4 Esdras 14:22 (an intertestimental Jewish writing)

▪ The author asks for inspiration from the Holy Spirit, but does not expect
to have words dictated to him

◦ 2 Timothy 3:14-17
▪ Praised for learning both from human teachers and Scripture

▪ Scripture is valuable for teaching, correcting error, and training believers

▪ Scripture is “breathed,” not spoken, by God, another indication that the

human is contributing to the work in some sense

◦ Conclusion: Even if there are real contradictions in Scripture, it shouldn't

affect our faith unless the contradictions are on matters Scripture actually
 intended to teach (doctrine vs. incidental details)

II. Why I'm glad the Bible contains discrepancies

◦ Real eyewitness testimony is marked by discrepancies; uniformity is a sign
of collusion and editing

◦ In historical inquiry, differences allow both accounts to be authenticated

◦ The variation in the Gospels is consistent with what one expects from
legitimate historical testimony

◦ The Church had the opportunity to smooth over the Gospel differences and
chose not to
• Second century Gospel harmony, The Disatessaron by Tatian

• This helps show the integrity of the Church and how it valued the
original over the “perfect”

◦ Conclusion: Differences help to establish the legitimacy of the Gospels and

allows them to be evaluated using normal historical inquiry

III. Strategies for resolving discrepancies

1. Read both passages in context. If simple common sense says this
wouldn't be treated as a contradiction in any other writing, then it isn't one
in the Bible either.
◦ 1 Samuel 17:50 vs. 1 Samuel 17:51 – What killed Goliath?

◦ 1 Kings 8:12-13 vs. Acts 7:48-50 (Quoting Isaiah 66:1-2) – Does

God live in temples or not?

2. Omission is not contradiction. When one Gospel contains a detail another

doesn't, it is a difference in choice of what to include by the author – it is
not a contradiction or indication of embellishment.

▪ Matthew 20:29-30 vs. Mark 10:46 – One blind man or two?

▪ Mark 16:1-4 vs. Matthew 28:1-2 vs. John 20:1 vs. Luke 24:1-2 –
Who discovered the empty tomb and how was the rock moved?

3. Jesus' ministry lasted several years. He obviously repeated the same

teachings on many occasions, and probably worked many similar miracles
 on different occasions. Also, quotations of Jesus are not intended to be
word-for-word, but rather capture the ideas He taught.

◦ Matthew 22:14-28 vs. Luke 19:12-24 – Talents, minas, or different

parables spoken on different days?

◦ Matthew 15:32-39 vs John 6:5-14 – Feeding of 4000 or 5000?

4. Chronology is not intended to be exact. The ancient methods of

recording history are different than our own. Events could be put in order
of importance, rather than in chronological order. Long events could be
compressed into a short time frame for narrative purposes (telescoping).
There is nothing inherently wrong about these methods, they are simply
different than what we are used to.

◦ Matthew 4:1-11 vs. Luke 4:1-13 – What order did the temptations of
Jesus take place in?

◦ Matthew 21:18-22 vs. Mark 11:12-14; 20-23 – How quickly did the
cursed fig tree whither?

5. All accounts are selective. No account will contain all the details –
apparent contradictions may present different viewpoints or reflect different
moments within the same event.

◦ Matthew 27:5 vs. Acts 1:18 – How did Judas die?

◦ Luke 23:39-41 vs. Matthew 27:44 and Mark 15:32 – Did both thieves
mock Jesus or just one?

6. Similar words can have different meanings in different contexts. Each

passage must be read in context to see if it is actually referring to the same
thing or simply using the same words for a different purpose.

◦ Matthew 7:21 vs. Acts 2:21 – Is everyone who calls on the Lord
saved or not?

◦ John 3:16-18 vs. Job 1:6 vs. Romans 1:14 – How many sons does
God have?

7. Progressive Revelation. God revealed His ultimate plan for salvation little
 by little. As such, certain truths were hid during the earliest revelations,
only to be revealed later. We should be cautious to claim progressive
revelation, as God does not change His mind at random, but as long as there
is an underlying principle behind both revelations, we can propose such a
solution.
◦ 2 Samuel 24:1 vs. 1 Chronicles 21:1 – Who incited David to take a
census?

◦ Exodus 20:8-10 vs Romans 14:5-6 – Is the Sabbath day special, or

are all days equal?

8. Miscellaneous cases. The above will resolve almost all issues. However, a
few issues may require understanding of the culture in which the text was
written.
◦ Mark 15:25 says Jesus was crucified at the third hour, while John
19:14 says Jesus was handed over for crucifixion at the six hour.
Time keeping was inexact and multiple systems were in place. In the
Jewish system, the 3rd hour would be 8:30–9am, while in the Roman
system the 6th hour would to 6am. Thus to two account complicate,
rather than contradict when understood in this way. (It took 2-3
hours for the crucifixion preparations to take place after Jesus was
handed over.)

◦ Resources: http://apologeticspress.org/AllegedDiscrepancies.aspx
& https://defendinginerrancy.com/bible-difficulties/

IV. Conclusion
◦ We can easily resolve almost all discrepancies, so if we encounter one we
can't immediately solve, we should have confidence that there is a solution.

◦ The Church has known and debated the discrepancies for millennia. All
have solutions and many have multiple suggested solutions.

◦ Leaving the difficulties instead of editing them out shows the honesty of the
Church and authenticity of the text.

◦ The Bible challenges us to test our faith, not just blindly believe a text was
handed down to us in divine “perfection.” Scripture passes the test
overwhelmingly.