Problem: One of the charges of contradiction brought by skeptics against the Bible is the surface appearance of contradiction between Matthew’s genealogical list (1:1-17) and the one provided by Luke (3:23-38). As is always the case, the charge of contradiction is premature and reflects an immature appraisal of the extant evidence. In every case of alleged contradiction, further investigation has yielded additional evidence that exonerates the Bible and further verifies its inerrancy. The alleged discrepancies pertaining to Matthew and Luke’s genealogies were explained and answered long ago (e.g., Haley, 1977, pp. 325-326; McGarvey, 1910, pp. 344-346; McGarvey, 1974, pp. 51-55; cf. Lyons, 2003).
Continue reading →

Problem: Immediately following Jesus’ baptism, Matthew, Mark, and Luke record how God the Father spoke from heaven. Most Bible students are familiar with the words, “My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” However, it may have never dawned on some that Mark and Luke’s accounts differ from Matthew’s in that they record God speaking directly to Jesus (“You are My beloved Son”—Mark 1:11; Luke 3:22, emp. added), while Matthew records the Father speaking to others, saying, “This is My beloved Son” (3:17, emp. added). Does this represent a legitimate Bible contradiction as some contend (cf. Wells, 2009; Ehrman, 2009, pp. 39-40), or is there a reasonable explanation to the different wordings?
Continue reading →

Problem: In his book The Encyclopedia of Biblical Errancy, skeptic Dennis McKinsey confidently asserts that the “contradictory” genealogies found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 open up “a Pandora’s box that apologists would just as soon remained closed forever.”1 One “contradiction” he cited revolves around the father of Joseph.2 Whereas Matthew 1:16 states that “Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ,” Luke 3:23 says, “Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli.” How is it that Joseph could be the son of both Jacob and Heli? Is this a contradiction that Christian apologists prefer to keep under lock and key as McKinsey suggests? Not at all.
Continue reading →

Problem: Why does Joseph (Jesus’s supposed father) have two different fathers listed in Matthew 1:16 and Luke 3:23?

Matthew 1:16
And Jacob begot Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom was born Jesus who is called Christ.

Luke 3:23
Now Jesus Himself began His ministry at about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli.
Continue reading →

Problem: Most people familiar with the few details given in Scripture about the early life of Jesus are aware of the fact that following the visit from the wise men, Matthew indicates that Joseph and Mary took Jesus and fled to Egypt at the command of God (Matthew 2:13-14). Later, after Herod’s death, Jesus’ family departed Egypt for Nazareth where they made their home (Matthew 2:19-23). According to some, however, Luke’s account of the early life of Jesus contradicts Matthew’s (Wells, 2011; cf. Ehrman, 2005, p. 10). Luke indicates that after Jesus’ birth, and once Mary’s days of “purification according to the law of Moses were completed” (2:22), which would have been about six weeks after Jesus was born (Leviticus 12:3-4), Joseph and Mary took Jesus to the temple in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22-38). The inspired physician then writes: “So when they had performed all things according to the law of the Lord, they returned to Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth” (Luke 2:39, emp. added). Since Luke mentions nothing about Egypt, and Matthew says nothing about a trip to Nazareth soon after Jesus’ birth, allegedly either Matthew or Luke is mistaken.
Continue reading →

Problem: The opening chapters of Luke’s gospel provide a classic account of Jesus’ birth with which we are all quite familiar: Mary and Joseph’s trip to Bethlehem for the census, Jesus placed in the manger, the angel’s appearance to the shepherds, etc. Yet just here, with the angel’s words, the attentive reader will discover a small but noteworthy difference between major Bible translations. The classic account, which contains those treasured words “goodwill toward men,” is found in the King James Version (as well as modern versions like the NKJV and MEV), and echoed in many of our hymns and Christmas traditions. It reads:
Continue reading →

Problem: According to the world’s most celebrated atheist, Richard Dawkins, “the gospels are ancient fiction” (2006, p. 97). They “[a]ll have the status of legends, as factually dubious as the stories of King Arthur and his Knights of the Round Table”—full of “invented, made-up fiction” (pp. 96-97). Dawkins wonders why the “many unsophisticated Christians…who take the Bible very seriously indeed as a literal and accurate record of history and hence as evidence supporting their religious beliefs,” do not “notice those glaring contradictions” in the gospel accounts? (p. 94). What kind of “contradictions,” exactly? Consider the very first one that he mentions, regarding Jesus’ birth in Bethlehem.
Continue reading →

Problem: The precision with which Luke reported historical detail has been documented over and over again through the centuries by archaeologists and biblical scholars. In every instance, where sufficient archaeological evidence has surfaced, Luke has been vindicated as an accurate and meticulously precise writer. Skeptics and critics have been unable to verify even one anachronism or discrepancy with which to discredit the biblical writers’ claim of being governed by an overriding divine influence.
Continue reading →

Problem: It is a popular view these days. Many people have the impression that the Bible is simply an outdated book of fairytales and contradictions.

“You can’t trust the Bible! It’s full of contradictions!”
Continue reading →