Problem: The high priest Ananias commanded that Paul be struck on the mouth. Paul rebuked him for doing so, and those who stood by condemned Paul for reviling the high priest. Paul responded by claiming, “I did not know … that he was the high priest” (Acts 23:5). But this is highly unlikely, since Paul himself was a member of the Jewish Sanhedrin and worked closely with him before his conversion (Acts 9:1–3).
Problem: Paul refers to Ananias—the high priest—as a “whitewashed wall.” It was illegal to revile rulers in Israel (Ex. 22:28), and Paul later retracts this comment. Was this a sin for Paul to react like this? Also, how could Paul—a former Pharisee—not know who the high priest was?
Problem: Luke records,
“Therefore do this that we tell you. We have four men who are under a vow; 24 take them and purify yourself along with them, and pay their expenses so that they may shave their heads; and all will know that there is nothing to the things which they have been told about you, but that you yourself also walk orderly, keeping the Law. 25 But concerning the Gentiles who have believed, we wrote, having decided that they should abstain from meat sacrificed to idols and from blood and from what is strangled and from fornication.’ 26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, purifying himself along with them, went into the temple giving notice of the completion of the days of purification, until the sacrifice was offered for each one of them” (Acts 21:23-26).
Paul was previously against the necessity of following the Law (Gal. 2; Acts 15). Moreover, the author of Hebrews considers animal sacrifices as a case of apostatizing from Christ. Did Paul succumb to pressure in offering this sacrifice at the Temple?
Problem: Verse nine says he was “taken up dead.” But in the very next verse Paul said, “his life is in him.”
Problem: Luke writes, “They kept telling Paul through the Spirit not to set foot in Jerusalem” (Acts 21:4). Later, Agabus says, “This is what the Holy Spirit says: ‘In this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles’” (Acts 21:11). Each place Paul goes, the believers tell him not to go. Is Paul being head strong?
Problem: Luke records, “God was performing extraordinary miracles by the hands of Paul, 12 so that handkerchiefs or aprons were even carried from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out” (Acts 19:11-12).
Problem: Jesus commanded His followers to “make disciples of all the nations” (Matt. 28:19) and to be witnesses to “the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). But in Acts 16 Paul and Timothy “were forbidden by the Holy Spirit to preach the word in Asia” (v. 6).
Problem: In the earlier chapter, Paul fought against the requirement of circumcision in the previous chapter (Acts 15; c.f. Ga. 5:2). However, here in the next chapter, he quickly circumcises Timothy?
Problem: Paul’s main point in Galatians can be summarized in his words, “If you become circumcised, Christ will profit you nothing” (Gal. 5:2). Yet Paul admits that he had Timothy circumcised “because of the Jews who were in that region” (Acts 16:3). Wasn’t this a contradiction to his own teaching.
Problem: The ability of modern medicine to sustain life by blood transfusion is a common practice that has no doubt been used by Christians. However, this verse is used by some religious groups, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses, to claim that blood transfusions are against God’s will.
Problem: Amillennial theologians believe that Amos’ prediction of rebuilding the Temple is fulfilled in the church. Amos writes, “In that day I will raise up the fallen booth of David, and wall up its breaches; I will also raise up its ruins and rebuild it as in the days of old” (Amos 9:11). Since believers are the new Temple (1 Cor. 3:16; 6:19), James was claiming that the church replaces or fulfills this promises. Is this the case?
Problem: Some scholars believe that Acts 15 and Galatians 2:1-10 are describing the same event from two different perspectives, because these two events have so much in common.[1] First, both passages describe an important event in Jerusalem. Second, both passages have the same people involved (e.g. Paul, Barnabas, Peter, James and Judaizers). Third, both passages seem to be dealing with the same subject (i.e. Gentile acceptance and participation in both salvation and fellowship). Fourth, both passages mention that circumcision is not necessary for salvation. And fifth, both passages refer to the internal struggles of Christian believers. Are these passages describing the same event?
Problem: Jesus mentions fasting in this passage (Mt. 6:16-18). Does this mean that believers should fast today?
Problem: Luke records, “When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed” (Acts 13:48). Does this passage imply that some are appointed to eternal life and others are appointed to hell?
Problem: Paul tells the unbelieving Jewish leaders, “Behold, you scoffers, and marvel, and perish; for I am accomplishing a work in your days, a work which you will never believe, though someone should describe it to you” (Acts 13:41). Here he is citing Habakkuk 1:5. Why is he citing this passage?