By Harold Kemp, Compass Distributors

A number of people publish articles on the Web claiming that there are contradictions in the Word of God. One such article is written by a person calling himself "Strike". We will criticize the sort of reasoning used in such writings by using his article as an example.

Let's first of all be clear on what is meant by a "contradiction". If we say that "Jack arrived from Montreal at 9 o'clock today, and stayed here for twelve hours" and somebody else says "Jack left for Montreal at 9 o'clock today, after being here for twelve hours," that is a contradiction. Both statements can not be true at the same time.

If we say "Jack left for Montreal today in his car" and somebody else says "Jack went to Montreal today by train", that is an "apparent discrepancy". It is not a contradiction because we saw Jack getting in his car and saying that he was heading for Montreal; whereas in actual fact he drove to a nearby city, where there was train service, and got on the train. So, although there is an apparent discrepancy, both statements are true.

If we say "Jack left for Montreal today in his car and had a flat tire on the way" and somebody else says "Jack went to Montreal today in his car and had two flat tires on the way", that is an "apparent discrepancy". But it does not necessarily mean that both statements cannot be true. It is entirely possible that he had two flat tires. The fact that we only mention one of them does not make our statement false. Perhaps we are leading up to a discussion of the incident involving one of the flat tires and we are not interested in discussing the other one because it is not relevant to our story. If we had said "he only had one flat tire" our statement would be false.

If we say "Jack left for Montreal today" and on the same day Jack told somebody "I will be living in Charlottetown for the rest of my life". To call this a contradiction is nonsense because, if he said this, he is obviously going to Montreal on a trip but he intends to have residence in Charlottetown for the rest of his life.

If another person says that he and twenty other witnesses saw Jack in Montreal on December 1 at a convention, and we attempt to refute that by saying, "Jack could not have been there because he always visits his mother on her birthday, and her birthday is December 1," obviously we are not telling the truth.

The article by "Strike" does not offer proof for any "contradictions". In fact, most of the things he talks about are not even apparent discrepancies. They are a result of his quoting things without considering the context in which they appear and, in some cases, he is either not telling the truth or writing nonsense. So we are going to deal with three categories: (1) untrue statements by "Strike", (2) arguments put forth by "Strike" that are nonsense, (3) apparent discrepancies.

Most of his "contradictions" are so ridiculous that they are not worth talking about. The following is one prime example that we will give in order to illustrate what we mean.

Strike points out that the apostle Paul claims that Jesus was put to death by "the rulers of the age" (1 Corinthians 2:8). This, he claims, contradicts the record of the Gospel writers who claimed that He was put to death by Pilate, the governor.

This "contradiction" is simply not true: (1) The rulers of the Jews were the ones who captured Jesus and delivered Him to Pilate. (2) Pilate found no fault in Him.

See Matthew 27:1,2 which reads "When the morning was come, all the chief priests and elders of the people took counsel against Jesus to put him to death: And when they had bound him, they led him away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor."

Also see Matthew 27:24 which reads "When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, 'I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it'."

The same facts are related in Mark 15:1,14, Luke 23:1,22 and John 18:28, 19:4.

So, we will limit our refutations to topics where some explanation is required. We have selected five in each category as examples.

First, we will deal with some topics where "Strike" is not telling the truth.

(1) "Strike" claims that Jesus was ignorant of the scriptures that He quoted.

In Mark 2:25-26 He said "...Have ye never read what David did, when he had need, and was an hungred, he, and they that were with him? How he went into the house of God in the days of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shewbread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him?"

In 1 Samuel 21:1-6 is a record of the incident that Jesus was referring to. It reads "Then came David to Nob to Ahimelech the priest...:and said unto him, ...give me five loaves of bread in mine hand...So the priest gave him hallowed bread: for there was no bread there but the shewbread..."

The criticism of Jesus, by "Strike", is the fact that the priest that gave David the shewbread was Ahimelech, not Abiathar.

But Jesus didn't say that Abiathar was the priest that gave David the shewbread. He said that the incident occurred "in the days of Abiathar the high priest". This is true. Abiathar was the high priest at that time.

(2) "Strike" claims that calling Jesus a sacrificial lamb (see John 1:29,36) is not correct according to the Old Testament.

Actually, this is correct. Read Exodus 12:21. "Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them, Draw out and take you a lamb according to your families, and kill the passover."

(3) "Strike" claims that Christ was raised as a spirit according to 1 Corinthians 15:44 and 1 Peter 3:18 but that He was raised with a physical body according to other scriptures.

Many scriptures tell us that Christ was raised with a physical body. In the 15th chapter of 1 Corinthians, the theme is different types of bodies. 1 Corinthians 15:44 actually says: "It is sown a natural body; it is raised a spiritual body." This is not a "spirit". It is a "spiritual body."

And 1 Peter 3:18 says "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit"

It doesn't say that He was raised as a spirit. It says that He was made alive by the (Holy) Spirit.

(4) "Strike" claims that Judges 5:25-27 says that Sisera was killed while standing and drinking milk but that Judges 4:20-21 says that he was killed while asleep.

Judges 4:19-21 reads "And he said unto her, Give me, I pray thee, a little water to drink; for I am thirsty. And she opened a bottle of milk, and gave him drink, and covered him. Again he said unto her, Stand in the door of the tent, and it shall be, when any man doth come and enquire of thee, and say, Is there any man here? that thou shalt say, No. Then Jael Heber's wife took a nail of the tent, and took an hammer in her hand, and went softly unto him, and smote the nail into his temples, and fastened it into the ground: for he was fast asleep and weary. So he died."

Judges 5 is a song by Deborah and Barak. Starting at verse 25 it reads "He asked water, and she gave him milk; she brought forth butter in a lordly dish. She put her hand to the nail, and her right hand to the workmen's hammer; and with the hammer she smote Sisera, she smote off his head, when she had pierced and stricken through his temples."

It does not say that he was killed while still drinking the milk.

(5) "Strike" claims that, according to Isaiah 38:5-8, the reversing of the sundial was a sign that God would defend the city against the Assyrians but that according to 2 Kings 20:5-10, the reversing of the sundial was a sign that God would heal Hezekiah.

2 Kings 20:5-10 reads "...I will heal thee: on the third day thou shalt go up unto the house of the LORD. And I will add unto thy days fifteen years; and I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria; and I will defend this city for mine own sake, and for my servant David's sake And Isaiah said, Take a lump of figs. And they took and laid it on the boil, and he recovered. And Hezekiah said unto Isaiah, What shall be the sign that the LORD will heal me, and that I shall go up into the house of the LORD the third day? And Isaiah said, This sign shalt thou have of the LORD, that the LORD will do the thing that he hath spoken: shall the shadow go forward ten degrees, or go back ten degrees? And Hezekiah answered, It is a light thing for the shadow to go down ten degrees: nay, but let the shadow return backward ten degrees."

Isaiah 38:5-8 reads "Go, and say to Hezekiah, Thus saith the LORD, the God of David thy father, I have heard thy prayer, I have seen thy tears: behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years. And I will deliver thee and this city out of the hand of the king of Assyria: and I will defend this city. And this shall be a sign unto thee from the LORD, that the LORD will do this thing that he hath spoken; Behold, I will bring again the shadow of the degrees, which is gone down in the sun dial of Ahaz, ten degrees backward. So the sun returned ten degrees, by which degrees it was gone down."

In 2 Kings 20:9 the sign that "the LORD will do the thing that he hath spoken", obviously refers back to verse 6 where He said "And I will add unto thy days fifteen years;".

In Isaiah 38:7 the sign that "the LORD will do this thing that he hath spoken", obviously refers back to verse 5 where He said "I will add unto thy days fifteen years".

Secondly, we will deal with some topics where the arguments put forth by "Strike" are nonsense.

(1) "Strike" claims that Jesus was hypocritical.

In Matthew 5:22 He said "...whosoever shall say, Thou fool, shall be in danger of hell fire" and in Matthew 23:15-17 He says "Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites!...Ye fools and blind..."

In Matthew 5:22, He is instructing people. In Matthew 23:15-17, He is preaching to hypocrites. He, being God, certainly has the authority to call a fool a fool.

(2) "Strike" claims that Jesus couldn't have been buried for 3 days and 3 nights because Mark 15:42 states that He was buried after sundown on Friday.

Actually, it says no such thing. Mark 15:42 says "And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath..."

The crucifixion occurred on the preparation of the passover (John 19:14), so the following day would be a sabbath. Obviously, Jesus was crucified on a Thursday (the fourteenth day of the Jewish first month). He died shortly after 3 o'clock in the afternoon (Matthew 27:46 says "about the ninth hour", which in Jewish time would have been about 3 o'clock p.m. our time).

So Jesus (as He predicted in Matthew 12:40) was "in the heart of the earth" for three days and three nights. This was during the daytime on Thursday, nighttime and daytime on Friday (the Jewish day went from sundown to sundown - night preceded day), nighttime and daytime on Saturday, and nighttime on Sunday - three days and three nights. He rose from the dead around dawn on Sunday, as the Bible clearly states. (Matthew 28:1-4)

The notion of the crucifixion being on Friday is a traditional religious stance that has nothing whatsoever to do with the Bible.

(3) "Strike" claims that Jesus was not the first person to rise from the dead.

He mentions several people who were raised from the dead, for example, "He said unto them, 'Give place: for the maid is not dead, but sleepeth'. And they laughed him to scorn. But when the people were put forth, he went in, and took her by the hand, and the maid arose." (Matt. 9:24,25).

This girl, and the others he mentions, were brought back from the dead but they, having a mortal body, eventually died.

Jesus is the first person to rise from the dead with an immortal body and remain alive - a much different type of resurrection!

(4) "Strike" claims that Jesus told His disciples that He would leave them (John 16:28) but, in Matthew 28:20, He said that He would always be with them.

In John 16 He told His disciples that He would be "physically" leaving them but He is always with us, as every believer knows.

In fact, in John 13:33 - 14:18, where He first tells them that He will be leaving, He also says "I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you." (John 14:18).

(5) "Strike" claims that Jesus' purpose was to break up families.

In Matthew 10:34-36 it says "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."

In all of Jesus' ministry, it is clear that He cared deeply for the entire human race. There are many incidents where He showed that he cared for families. The incident where He healed Peter's mother-in-law (Matt. 8:14-15), the incident where He raised the ruler's daughter (Matt. 9:24-26), the incident recorded in Luke 7:11-15 where He raised a dead man and presented him to his widowed mother, to name a few.

In the message recorded in Matthew 10:34-36 He is simply predicting that anyone who follows Him can expect opposition, sometimes even from his own family. This is obviously referring to cases where the family members choose to continue following evil rather than God.

Thirdly, we will deal with some topics where there are apparent discrepancies due to "Strike" not considering the context.

(1) "Strike" claims that God is presented as being partial toward people in, for example, Romans 8:29 but impartial toward people in, for example, Acts 10:34,35.

Romans 8:29 reads "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren."

Acts 10:34,35 reads "Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him."

The Bible makes it clear that God does not favor certain people. "The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Peter 3:9).

Nevertheless, being perfectly just, He can only justify those who repent of their sins and turn to Him.

What Acts 10:34,35 actually means is that God did not favor the Jewish people over the Gentiles.

(2) "Strike" claims that Romans 2:12 says "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law..." but Romans 4:15 says "...where no law is, there is no transgression."

Paul has not finished his statement in verse 12 of Romans 2. Note the whole passage "For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law; (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified. For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves: Which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another;)"

For those who do not know the law there is obviously "no transgression of the law" (Romans 4:15) but those who do not have the law have "the work of the law written in their hearts" (Romans 2:15) so they are responsible for their actions.

(3) "Strike" claims that the Bible says that "everyone sins" (Romans 3:23) and it also says that "no one born of God sins" (1 John 3:9).

1 John 3:9 says that whoever is born of God does not "practice" sin ("Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin"); but the same writer, in the same epistle, says "If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us" (1 John 1:8).

(4) "Strike" claims that Jesus used violence.

In John 2:15 it says "And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence; make not my Father's house an house of merchandise."

Jesus preached about the need for gentleness. He said "Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth." (Matt. 5:5). He also said "...I am gentle and lowly in heart..." (Matt. 11:29).

There are only two incidents in the Bible where He used force. The one recorded in John 2:15 and the one recorded in Matt. 21:12 (also recorded in Mark 11:15 and Luke 19:45).

In neither of these incidents, does it mention Him doing any harm to an individual. He just drove them out of the temple because they were committing extortion in God's house.

In Luke 22:36, when the time had come for the powers of darkness to take Him, he told His disciples to get swords. This was obviously for self-defense because, when Peter used the sword offensively, Jesus healed the harm that was done and admonished Peter saying "Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword." (Matt. 26:52).

(5) "Strike" claims that the gospel was not available for certain races.

In Matthew10:5-6 He said "...Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel."

It is clear from many scriptures, that the gospel is to be preached to all nations (See Matt. 28:19-20, Luke 24:47, Acts 1:8, 1 Timothy 2:4, to name a few). Obviously, the statement in Matthew 10:5-6 is referring to the beginning of His ministry.

The gospel has always been available to all people since Adam and Eve rebelled. The preaching at the beginning of Jesus’ ministry was directed at the Israelites but He indicated that the gospel was available to all. Every time Jesus healed a Gentile or a Samaritan He demonstrated His forgiveness to other people groups. The preaching ministry expanded later under the direction of the Holy Spirit and is recorded in Acts.

We don't see any point in discussing any more topics. He makes false statements, argues nonsense, and takes verses out of their context and quotes them in isolation, thus indicating some "apparent" contradictions. Surely any honest person will take the time to read complete passages and see what the writers of the Bible were really saying.

The Bible is a collection of books that deal with God's truth. The main message is centered around telling people to turn from sin and turn to God for forgiveness and the power to have victory over sin. Even the "best of us" have committed sins and need to get right with God. If a person repents (turns from sin and turns to God) they will come to know Jesus Christ in a real way. This is the important thing; not worrying about apparent discrepancies in the Bible.

If any of our readers are bothered by any so-called "contradictions" that we have not dealt with in this article, please feel free to write us and we will deal with them in some future article.

Does The Word of God Have Contradictions? Copyright © 2000 by Compass Distributors

All Scripture quotations taken from the King James Version.