BIBLICAL "INCONSISTENCIES" ANSWERED

1. Gospel Discrepancies
Non-Christians say there are too many discrepancies among the gospels. But truly, judging by the ancient standards (which would not judge paraphrases, changes in wording, explanatory additions, etc.), there are no discrepancies among the gospels. And if the gospels were too similar, people would have charged the authors with a conspiracy amongst themselves. But, this is not the case. This does, however, reveal a hard close-mindedness to the truth of Jesus Christ.

2. The Centurion's Sick Slave
Did the centurion himself come to ask Jesus to heal his servant as apparently told in Matthew 8, or did the centurion send elders, as told in Luke 7? Well, back then, it was common (as it still is today, in presidential speeches for instance) for a message to be delivered by someone, yet it was actually from someone else, and yet it is still attributed to the originator. Reading Luke's account, and then reading Matthew's, you can see it's clear that Matthew is implying that the message was from the centurion indeed, but the messages were relayed back and forth between Jesus and the centurion, via the centurion's friends and elders.

3. Gadara or Gerasa?
Mark and Luke said that Jesus sent demons into the swine at Gerasa, but Matthew says it was Gadara. However, even more, Gerasa isn't anywhere near the Sea of Galilee. How can one argue with this? You must do a little archaeological research, first of all. In doing so, you will find that Gerasa is actually a town, while Gadara is a province! But what about the fact that Gerasa is not anywhere near the Sea of Galilee like the Bible said it was? Interesting point, but it should be noted that those who object to the authenticity of the gospels are only talking about a certain Gerasa (which was, of course, no where near where the Bible says Gerasa is), but near the Sea of Galilee, in the province of Gadara, there was a town which we know today as being called "Khersa." And, in its original Greek/Hebrew form, it would indeed have come out sounding like "Gerasa." Just as the Bible said. No contradictions whatsoever.

4. Biases
Let us examine the role of biases and prejudices in the writing of the gospels. Did the gospel writers want to falsify facts to change the story or make Jesus look good? If so, why would they do it if all they got from it was criticism, getting ostrasized, and ultimately being killed for it? It just isn't a rational accusation.

5. Jeremiah or Zechariah?
In Matthew 27:9, Matthew writes, "Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: 'They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel.'" Matthew attributes this saying to "Jeremiah" when actually it was Zechariah who prophesied concerning this (in Zechariah 11:12-13). However, a contradiction only seems to exist to one who is ignorant of Jewish history and culture. Back in Jesus' day, literary works were often named by the first word. For instance, the first words of Genesis were "In the beginning," which, in essence, is what "Genesis" means. Thus, the books of the prophets, since Jeremiah was the first book in the prophetic collection of scriptures, was often just referred to as "Jeremiah," or "The Prophet(s)". Matthew knew that Zechariah in particular was the one who spoke concerning the 30 pieces of silver, however, he just referred to the quote as being from Jeremiah (or, "The Works of the Prophets").

6. What Did Jesus Drink?
Lately, a lot of truly foolish controversy has taken place as to what Jesus drank on the cross. Matthew 27:48 and Mark 15:36 say Jesus drank vinegar. And Luke 23:36 and John 19:29 say that Jesus drank wine vinegar. As you can see there is no controversy as to what Jesus drank--He drank wine vinegar, or sometimes called just "vinegar". It was made of light wine rendered acid and was the common drink of Roman soldiers. The controversy stems from what Jesus was offered to drink the first time before He actually accepted the drink. Matthew 27:34 says that Jesus was offered to drink vinegar mixed with gall first, which He would not drink. Mark 15:23 says that Jesus was offered to drink wine mixed with myrrh first, which He would not drink. Well, the "wine" and "vinegar" isn't a problem, but what about the "myrrh" and "gall"? Another very ignorant question, since both expressions mean the same thing! The wine vinegar was made bitter by the infusion of wormwood or some other bitter substance. It was usually offered out of mercy to help ease the suffering of the crucified victim since it was known to numb pain. Jesus did not take the vinegar with the anodyne in it, because as Jesus said in John 18:11, He was determined on drinking the entire cup His Father had given Him and was at that moment suffering for the sins of the world because of His love for them.