Who was Josiah's successor?
Jehoahaz - 2 Chron 36:1
Shallum - Jeremiah 22:11
Shallum is another name for Jehoahaz. Often Old Testament patriarchs and kings had two names: Abram and Abraham, Jacob and Israel, Jehoahaz and Shallum.
The differences in the census figures of Ezra and Nehemiah.
See the discussion in Archer, pp. 229-231 (referenced in endnote 5).
What was the color of the robe placed on Jesus during his trial?
scarlet - Matthew 27:28
purple John 19:2
To Matthew the robe looked scarlet, but to John the robe looked purple. Maybe it was maroon! Why is this a problem?
What did they give him to drink?
vinegar - Matthew 27:34
wine with myrrh - Mark 15:23
They gave him wine vinegar mixed with myrrh. Why is this a problem?
How long was Jesus in the tomb?
Depends where you look; Matthew 12:40 gives Jesus prophesying that he will spend "three days and three nights in the heart of the earth", and Mark 10:34 has "after three days (meta treis emeras) he will rise again". As far as I can see from a quick look, the prophecies have "after three days", but the post-Resurrection narratives have "on the third day".
The Jews of Jesus time saw any combination of three days as including the nights, so a discussion about “three days” or “three days and three nights” or “on the third day” was all the same. Jesus died on Friday the first day and rose again on Sunday, the third day
ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ ΑΩ
I assume that the above list of contradictions was the best that the atheist Mr. Merrit could come up with and post to the Net. Here are some more alleged contradictions and discrepancies that were overlooked by Mr. Merrit (I will try to add more from time to time), along with my responses:
The Resurrection of Righteous Jews
“Doesn’t the resurrections of various ‘saints’ in Matthew 27:51-53 contradict Paul’s assertion in 1 Corinthians 15:23 that Jesus’ resurrection was the “first fruits” of an apparent later general resurrection at the end of the age? Also, if the Matthew 27 account really is an historic event, why is there no collaboration from other ancient witnesses of such a public event?”30
This passage, when understood as being a reference to an actual event similar to the raising of Lazarus, would not contradict Paul because it would be referring to a temporary state of being. Some scholars, both liberal and conservative, see the passage as metaphoric due to its close eschatological reference to Ezekiel 37:12. Therefore, they feel that there is no need to take this passage as historical.31 However, verse 53 states that the saints came out of their tombs, went into the holy city (Jerusalem) and appeared to many. This seems to be language that was meant to be taken literally and historically.
I think it is better to see this as a temporary resurrection of recently buried godly men (and women!) who were raised and came back to loved ones in a manner similar to that of Lazarus in John 11, or Jairus’ daughter (Matthew 9:18-29; Mark 5:21-43). As to questions as to why, if this was an historical event, was it not mentioned by secular ancient historians, the answer is that it was answered indirectly. References in Josephus, the Mishnah, and Tacitus to Jesus’ reported miracles could include, as part of a general reference to alleged miracles, this incident along with the incident with Lazarus, the incident with Jairus’ daughter, and the incident reported in Matthew 27.
Who Answered Jesus’ Question About the Evil Tenants: Jesus or the Audience?
cf. Matthew 21:40-42; Mark 12:9f; Luke 20:15-1732
It is interesting to me that in both the Mark and Luke passages, the phrases, “He will come and destroy the [those] tenants and give the vineyard to others,” are virtually identical, while the Matthew parallel is constructed quite differently, while presenting the same facts. I think that the phrase in Matthew, attributed to the audience, follows the events as originally played between Jesus and his audience and gives the correct succession of events. Mark decided to summarize the response to Jesus’ question attributing it to no one, and Luke followed Mark. The Luke introduction to the response of the audience, “and [upon} understanding they said ἀκούσαντες δὲ εἶπαν ” reflects their overall understanding of the point that Jesus was making.
Was Jesus crucified the third hour or the sixth hour?
cf. Mark 15:25 Jesus was crucified at the “third” hour
John 19:14 Jesus was crucified at the “sixth” hour33
This apparent contradiction is answered effectively by Archer.34 Though some earlier apologists had tried to handle this “contradiction” by assuming a textual corruption, it would be better to understand that John was following the Roman numbering system that followed directly after midnight, while the Synoptic gospels were following a Palestinian numbering system which begins a six am. Therefore, when John says Jesus was still before Pilate at the sixth hour, or 6 am, Mark is saying that Jesus was crucified at the third hour, or 9 am. Jesus was still on the cross until at least 3 pm.
In addition, the apostate Bart Ehrman declares another contradiction concerning the phrase in John 19:14 “It was the day of the preparation of Passover Week.”35 John is understood to be saying that this was “the afternoon before the Passover meal was eaten” whereas the synoptic gospels declare that Jesus was before Pilate the morning after the meal was eaten. This “discrepancy” was effectively dealt with in 1931 by Charles Torrey and also presently by Samuele Bacchiocchi.36 The phrase “participation” (παρασκευὴ) was a “technical designation” for Friday and adopted by the early church. The (literally) “preparation of Passover” (παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα was the Friday of Passover Week which the NIV translates correctly.
Does God support cannibalism?
“I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and daughters, and they will eat one another's flesh because their enemies will press the siege so hard against them to destroy them.” (Jeremiah 19:9 NIV)
The context of the passage was a time in Israel’s history (Seventh Century) when Judah found itself between two superpowers, Babylon and Egypt. Jeremiah was prophesying the destruction of Judah and Jerusalem at the hands of the Babylonians because of the idolatry of its people and its arrogant king. The Babylonians would lay siege to Jerusalem cutting off their food supply and forcing the inhabitants to eat dead bodies (cf. Lamentations 4:10; expressly forbidden by God in Numbers 19:11, but predicted in Deuteronomy 28:56, 57). God’s disgust with the people of Judah for their rebellion and idolatry meant that God would give them into the hands of their enemies and terrible things would happen. The cannibalism would be due to the desperation of the people under siege, not God’s encouragement.
