The post contains Bart Ehrman’s comments about contradictions vs differences and then a list of the contradictions he often cites. The text below was prepared by Claude.ai using the transcript of his 15-minute lecture posted to BSA titled Let There Be Light: What’s Your Favorite Bible Contradiction? (Bart Responds). The transcript is in his Dropbox directory. All emphasis below is mine.
Summary: Bart Ehrman on His Favorite Bible Contradictions
Ehrman opens by drawing a key distinction he thinks matters for this whole conversation: a difference between two accounts is not the same as a contradiction. A contradiction exists only when two accounts cannot both be true — one is right and the other wrong (or both are wrong), but they cannot be reconciled. He notes that even fellow scholars often blur this line, citing the differing numbers/names of women at the tomb, or one vs. two angels, as false examples of “contradictions” that are actually just differences that can be harmonized.
Two Minor (but Illustrative) Contradictions
1. The staff instruction. In Mark, Jesus tells the disciples not to take a backpack, sandals, or money — but to take a staff. In Matthew’s near-identical passage, he tells them not to take a staff. Ehrman rejects the common apologetic explanation (that Matthew was just “emphasizing” the point) — it’s a genuine contradiction, even if Matthew had theological reasons for creating it.
2. Jairus’s daughter. In Mark, Jairus comes to Jesus while his daughter is still alive and dying; Jesus is delayed by the woman with the hemorrhage, and the girl dies before he arrives (though he raises her anyway). In Matthew, Jairus tells Jesus his daughter has already died when he first approaches. Ehrman recounts an anecdote from his PhD days at Princeton Seminary, where a European scholar tried to reconcile this by claiming the miracle happened twice — a story Ehrman says convinced him that real contradictions do exist.
His Three Favorites, from the Passion Narrative
Ehrman calls these the ones he considers unresolvable and theologically significant — these are his actual favorites:
1. The day of Jesus’s death. In John, Jesus dies on the day of preparation for Passover (before the meal), timing his death to coincide with the slaughter of the Passover lambs — reinforcing John’s “Lamb of God” theology. In Mark, Jesus eats the Passover meal with his disciples first and is crucified the following day, on Passover itself. Ehrman argues John altered the historical timeline deliberately to make a theological point, but that doesn’t make it any less a contradiction.
2. Where the resurrected Jesus appears. This is the one he says his students most often miss. In Mark, the women are told to instruct the disciples to meet Jesus in Galilee — and Matthew follows through: the disciples go directly to Galilee, where Jesus appears and departs. In Luke, however, Jesus explicitly appears only in and around Jerusalem on the day of the resurrection (the road to Emmaus, then a room with the disciples), and he tells them explicitly to stay in Jerusalem until Pentecost — which Acts (also written by Luke) confirms they do, for 40 days plus until Pentecost (50 days after the crucifixion). Galilee and “don’t leave Jerusalem” cannot both be correct.
3. A self-contradiction within Luke-Acts. In Luke 24:51, Jesus ascends to heaven on the very day of his resurrection. But Acts (same author) says he remained on earth for 40 days before ascending. Ehrman notes this may hinge on a textual variant, but points out Luke creates similar internal inconsistencies elsewhere too — citing the three retellings of Paul’s conversion (Acts 9, 22, and 26), which differ in detail from each other.
His Broader Point
Ehrman closes by rejecting the idea that finding contradictions means the Bible “can’t be trusted” and isn’t worth reading. Instead, he argues that identifying a genuine contradiction should prompt readers to ask what each author was trying to emphasize — and that understanding why the discrepancy exists often deepens comprehension of each individual passage.