BIBLE CONTRADICTIONS: JESUS' EARLY LIFE AND MINISTRY

The following contradictions involve differences between the various gospel accounts as far as they describe Jesus' early life and teachings.

The infant Christ was taken into Egypt (Luke 2:22,39)

The infant Christ was not taken into Egypt. (Matthew 2:14-15,19, 21,23)

Christ was tempted in the wilderness (Mark 1:12-13)

Christ was not tempted in the wilderness (John 2:1-2)

John was not in prison when Jesus went to Galilee (John 1:43; 3:22-24)

John was in prison when Jesus went to Galilee (Mark 1:14)

Concerning these first three pairs of contradiction, note how the author of them cleverly gives the impression that the gospels actually say that Christ was not taken to Egypt, that he was not tempted in the wilderness, and that John was not in prison at the time. In fact, the various accounts nowhere make those negative pronouncement; they are merely the author's own comments.

Well, why then does the critic feel justified in stating that there are contradictions present? In each case, he is making an argument from silence. Thus, Luke happens not to mention that Christ was taken to Egypt, John happens not to mention the temptation in the wilderness, and John does not specifically state that John the Baptist was not in prison at the time in question. Each of the gospel accounts is very selective in which events they choose to relate and which ones they omit.

One needs to see the whole picture to get a total view of the story. And this is best done by purchasing what is called a harmony of the gospels. There are several editions in print, some containing the Synoptic Gospels and others also including the Gospel of John. The gospel accounts are presented in parallel columns arranged approximately in chronological order. Using a Harmony, one can see at a glance that in each of the three sets of “contradictions” given above, the events in the first listed scriptures occurred before those in the second listings.

One comment regarding the various harmonies available. They all need to rely on some value judgments, and therefore they may differ from one another in some details. This occurs because (1) some gospel authors group their material topically instead of chronologically and (2) on occasion it is not clear whether two accounts are of the same event or only a similar one. The next contradiction below is an example of the latter phenomenon.

Christ preached his first sermon on a mountain. (Matthew 5:1-2)

Christ preached his first sermon on a plain. (Luke 6:17, 20)

The first thing to note is that the critic is up to his old tricks again by implying that these gospels actually say that this was the “first sermon” given by Christ. Instead, it just happens in each case to be the first recorded sermon. For all we know, Christ may have given many sermons before that time. And thus, these could in fact be two entirely different occasions, as many scholars believe. A number of the teachings are indeed identical in both accounts, but that is natural considering that Jesus probably repeated many of his teachings when he encountered a new audience who had never heard him.

But there are a number of other scholars who believe that both accounts refer to the same occasion. They explain the somewhat different description of the setting as follows: The sermon was indeed given on a mountain, but obviously not on the very top of a steep mountain. Instead, it took place somewhere on a relatively flat portion (a plain) of the mountain side where the people could comfortable situate themselves.

Disciples commanded to go forth with staff and sandals (Mark 6:8-9; Luke 10:4)

Disciples commanded to go forth with neither staff nor sandals (Matthew 10:9-10)

At last, here is a genuine contradiction between the two accounts. It has been labeled as “a famous so-called contradiction” and “a well-known problem of harmony.” It is illustrative of many times in the New Testament where the gospel authors disagree on minor details. This disturbs many Christians, who seem to agree with the tongue-in-cheek comment: “A man with one clock always knows what time it is. A man with two clocks is never quite sure.” In fact, it is always helpful to have two clocks because you will at least have a pretty good idea of what the time is. The one clock only gives the illusion of accuracy since it may be far off or have stopped altogether.

Well after Mohammed's death, one of his followers saw that all the copies of the Koran were rounded up. He then burned all of them (which apparently disagreed in a number of places) except the one he personally felt was the most accurate. Thus, the followers of Islam have to rely on only one rather late clock. In contrast, we have four gospels that we can compare. It gives us four largely independent witnesses to the events of Christ's life. In the particular case above, we can say with great assurance that Jesus did send his disciples out with only minimal provisions in order to be dependent on God's provision and the charity of those they met up with, whether or not the disciples had sandals or staff.

France says, “Most readers, however, do not find it easy to get excited about this 'gospel discrepancy'...; whether the tradition actually forbade the disciples to carry a staff or not, the thrust of the passage is hardly affected.”

But for those who are still concerned and would like a little more assurance here, consider the following possibilities:

F. F. Bruce, Hard Sayings of the Bible: ”The differences remind us that in the Gospels we have the meaning of Jesus, his voice, so to speak, transmitted to us, but not his exact words.” Remember that they had to be translated from Aramaic to Greek. “Only if one has a very legal mind is there a significant difference.” “Jesus normally speaks in the hyperbole [exaggerated tone] of a wisdom teacher, not a Pharisee.” Witness the later time when he tells his apostles to go out carrying a sword.

Regarding the staff, both Barbieri and Grassmick try to resolve the problem by saying that Matthew's version states that they are not to procure (ktesesthe) these items while Mark says they could take (airosen) any staffs they already had. But R. T. France notes that this does not resolve the contradiction entirely since Luke uses the same verb as Mark.

Regarding the sandals, both Hendricksen and Ellison feel that the word “extra” in Matthew's account can apply to the sandals as well as the tunic. This would resolve that problem.

Getting back to staff, the Greek word appearing in all three accounts is rhabdon, a word having a number of meanings including a traveler's walking stick, a rod of authority, or an instrument of defense or punishment. Thus, Power concludes “that the staff permitted in Mark is the walking or shepherd's crook which became the symbol of office, while the rod prohibited by Matthew and Luke was the shepherd's club designed for protection.” This is possible, but there is no way of proving this contention.

Finally, I will give three additional possibilities offered by somewhat more liberal Bible scholars:

Blomberg: He proposes that Matthew has a composite account that includes the sending of the 72 and only recorded in Luke 10. This sending-out would have included the Twelve Apostles, who may have received separate instructions before they left.

Mann: “Possibly the mitigations [present in Matthew's and Luke's list of restrictions] have to do with the perils of the the situation for which this gospel [Mark's] was written.”

Marcus: Mark added deliberate parallels with Exodus 12:11 which, unlike Luke, include sandals.

In summary, we may never be able to remove the contradictions to the satisfaction of everyone, but the above offer some possible approaches to the problem.