More contradictions in the bible of lies..
#24 – Where Did the Family Go After Jesus’ Birth?Another notable contradiction between Matthew and Luke concerns the family’s movements after Jesus was born. In Matthew, the Holy Family doesn’t return to Nazareth immediately. Instead, they flee to Egypt to escape King Herod’s order to kill all the male infants in Bethlehem.
In Luke’s Gospel, however, there is no mention of Herod’s massacre or a flight to Egypt. After Jesus is born, the family completes the required purification rites in Jerusalem (Luke 2:22-24) and then returns directly to their home in Nazareth.
#25 – Who Visited Baby Jesus?
The visitors who come to see baby Jesus differ significantly between Matthew and Luke. In Matthew’s account, magi (wise men) from the East follow a star to Bethlehem, bringing gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh to honor the newborn “King of the Jews” (Matthew 2:1-12).
Luke, on the other hand, introduces humble shepherds who are visited by an angel announcing the birth of the Savior. The shepherds then go to Bethlehem to see Jesus, glorifying and praising God for what they had witnessed (Luke 2:8-20).
This difference but also other contradictory elements are analyzed in depth by Raymond E. Brown in his magnificent and enormous book The Birth of the Messiah. For those ready to immerse themselves in all the nuances and details of the birth narratives, it is a must-read.
#26 – Who Is For Jesus and Who Is Against Him?
Another discrepancy that Bart Ehrman highlights in his book Jesus Interrupted involves two seemingly contradictory sayings of Jesus as recorded in Matthew and Mark. In Matthew 12:30, Jesus states, “Whoever is not with me is against me,” drawing a clear line between allegiance and opposition. Yet, in Mark 9:40, he appears to express the opposite sentiment: “Whoever is not against us is for us.” These sayings, while similar in structure, convey starkly different messages.
Luke compresses the timeline, while Matthew focuses on events connected to Herod. Different emphasis does not equal contradiction. Different visitors at different times are not contradictory. In each case, the differences reflect distinct emphases, audiences, and theological purposes rather than direct logical contradictions.
#27 – The Council of Jerusalem
The description of the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15 differs in emphasis from Paul’s account in Galatians 2:1-10. In Galatians, Paul emphasizes his independence from the Jerusalem apostles, presenting the council as a private meeting where his mission to the Gentiles was endorsed.
The book of Acts, however, portrays the event as a public council where the apostles collectively and in harmony decide on guidelines for Gentile converts, such as abstaining from food sacrificed to idols.
#28 – Gamaliel’s Speech in Acts
Among the inconsistencies in the Bible, one stands out! In Acts 5:34-39, Gamaliel, a Pharisee, refers to Theudas and Judas the Galilean as examples of failed revolutionary leaders. However, this raises a historical issue, as Josephus, the Jewish historian, places Theudas after Judas the Galilean, suggesting that Luke (the author of Acts) may have confused the chronological order.
#29 – Paul’s Views on Women: Silence or Leadership?
One of the most interesting examples of the contradictions in the Bible emerges when comparing Paul’s seemingly supportive views on women’s roles in the church with a passage often attributed to him but suspected by scholars to be a later interpolation.
In 1 Corinthians 14:34-35, Paul is quoted as saying: “Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says.” In Romans 16, however, Paul commends several women for their roles in the early Christian community. He praises Phoebe as a deacon (Romans 16:1), Junia as “outstanding among the apostles” (16:7), and others such as Priscilla, who worked alongside him in ministry.
A private discussion among leaders and a later public decision are not mutually exclusive. Paul focuses on his independence; Acts focuses on church harmony. Different emphases reflect different rhetorical goals, not conflicting events and not a contradiction. Paul’s letters show regulated participation in some contexts and affirmation of women’s leadership in others. Context and genre explain much of the tension.