Deliberate Formal Contradictions in the Bible for Rhetorical Purposes

 

Formal contradictions according to the letter, need not be actual contradictions given the intended meaning. There are times when the Bible has formal contradictions, which aren't really contradictions when one factors in the intended meaning and context. 

Below is a list of some of the Deliberate Formal Contradictions in the Gospel of John. It's an excerpt from chapter 7 of Peter J. Williams' excellent book, Can We Trust the Gospels?

However, my brief journey into this subject will focus on how the Gospel of John contains many  deliberate formal contradictions  within itself and with other literature (such as the First Letter of John, which shows the same authorial style). Here are some examples.

 
1. God loves the world versus do not love the world

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16)

Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. (1 John 2:15)

2. People believed when they saw Jesus’s signs versus they did not believe

Now when he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Feast, many believed in his name when they saw the signs that he was doing. (John 2:23)

Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him. (John 12:37)

3. They know Jesus and where he comes from versus they do not

So Jesus proclaimed, as he taught in the temple, You know me, and you know where I come from.( John 7:28)

Jesus answered, Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.( John 8:14)

They said to him therefore, Where is your Father?Jesus answered, You know neither me nor my Father. If you knew me, you would know my Father also.( John 8:19)

4. If Jesus bears witness of himself, his testimony is not true, versus the opposite

If I bear witness about myself, my testimony is not true. (John 5:31, my trans.)

So the Pharisees said to him, You are bearing witness about yourself; your testimony is not true.Jesus answered, Even if I do bear witness about myself, my testimony is true, for I know where I came from and where I am going, but you do not know where I come from or where I am going.(John 8:13–14)

5. Jesus judges no one versus he has much to judge

You judge according to the flesh; I judge no one. (John 8:15)

Yet even if I do judge, my judgment is true, for it is not I alone who judge, but I and the Father who sent me. (John 8:16)
I have much to say about you and much to judge, but he who sent me is true, and I declare to the world what I have heard from him. (John 8:26)

6. Jesus did not come into the world to judge it versus he came to judge

If anyone hears my words and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world but to save the world. (John 12:47)

For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but in order that the world might be saved through him. (John 3:17)

Jesus said, For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.( John 9:39)

I hope that after reading the list above and studying the subtle way the Gospel of John is written, you will agree that these formal contradictions are deliberate. They are part of the author’s way of making us reflect more deeply on the multiple meanings of the words involved. 1  This sample prepares us to consider a quotation by skeptic Bart Ehrman from a book in which he explains what he thinks are the clearest contradictions within the Gospels:

One of my favorite apparent discrepancies—I read John for years without realizing how strange this one is—comes in Jesus’ Farewell Discourse,the last address that Jesus delivers to his disciples, at his last meal with them, which takes up all of chapters 13 to 17 in the Gospel according to John. In John 13:36, Peter says to Jesus, Lord, where are you going?A few verses later Thomas says, Lord, we do not know where you are going(John 14:5). And then, a few minutes later, at the same meal, Jesus upbraids his disciples, saying, Now I am going to the one who sent me, yet none of you asks me, ‘Where are you going? ’( John 16:5). Either Jesus had a very short attention span or there is something strange going on with the sources for these chapters, creating an odd kind of disconnect.

 

 

Sign Or No Sign For Jesus' Generation?

 

Here's a classic alleged Bible contradiction and a solution.

The Gospel of Mark say no sign will be given.

Mark 8:11-12 ESV

[11] The Pharisees came and began to argue with him, seeking from him a sign from heaven to test him. [12] And he sighed deeply in his spirit and said, “Why does this generation seek a sign? Truly, I say to you, no sign will be given to this generation.”

While the Gospel of Matthew and Luke say there will be a sign.

Matthew 12:39-40 ESV

[39] But he answered them, “An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. [40] For just as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the great fish, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

Matthew 16:4 ESV

[4] An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah.” So he left them and departed.

Luke 11:29-30 ESV

[29]  When the crowds were increasing, he began to say, “This generation is an evil generation. It seeks for a sign, but no sign will be given to it except the sign of Jonah. [30] For as Jonah became a sign to the people of Nineveh, so will the Son of Man be to this generation. 

Which is it? Notice that Matthew has Jesus addressing the issue of a sign on two different occasions in two different chapters. So apparently Jesus addressed the issue on multiple occasions and in different contexts. Often prompted by His hearers who specifically asked for a sign. 

But what kind of sign were they looking for? If Jesus really did miracles by healing the sick and doing things like multiplying bread, then wouldn't those things be considered signs? I would say "yes," and sufficient so that those who saw it ought to have eventually recognized Jesus as the Messiah [cf. Matt. 11:2-6, passim]. But they were not the kind of signs the people meant or wanted. They were asking for an undeniable public national miracle sign in the vein or manner of Moses with the Ten Plagues or the parting the Red/Reed Sea or delivering Israel from Egypt [or in the case of Jesus' audience, deliverance from the oppression of Rome]. One that would satisfy their sinful desire and craving for sensationalistic entertainment rather than what ought to lead them into a serious consideration of God's requirements and demands on their lives for true repentance, faith and righteous.

The answer to the apparent contradiction is that there would be no undeniable public national sign like they wanted would be given [the kind like parting the Red/Reed Sea or the Ten Plagues]. But rather a private sign would be given which only those whose hearts were open would be able to recognize and believe [Acts 10:41]. Namely, the resurrection of Jesus. So, both would be true. A sign both would and would not be given. Because they are of different kinds and purposes. 

In one sense the resurrection of Jesus was the greatest miracle of all. Yet, not openly seen [Act 10:41], so not apparently great to human eyes that don't believe or understand its cosmic significance. While the parting of the Red/Reed Sea seems [is apparently] greater than the alleged resurrection of an itinerant Jewish rabbi from an insignificancant and looked down upon town of Nazareth. Yet in reality the parting of the waters pales into insignificance compared to the greater spiritual deliverance purchased by the sufferings, crucifixion, death, burial and resurrection of the Son of God. A deliverance that would redeem all of creation, and would eventually bring about the New Heavens and the New Earth.

Also, the two types of signs had different purposes. The parting of the Sea was intended to be rationally coercive so that the state of one's heart had nothing to do with recognizing it. Whereas the sign of Jesus' resurrection is one that requires an "open heart" to see and recognize it ["open heart" understood either in an Arminian, Molinist, Calvinist (et al.) way. I'm a Calvinist, BTW]. 

Think of how in the film E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial only the kids could see E.T. The obvious intended allegory is that only the pure [or purer] in heart could see E.T. (at least for a while). While the adults, with less purer hearts, couldn't. Though eventually the adults were forced to acknowledge E.T.'s existence. Something similar is going on with Jesus Christ in Redemptive History. This is why Jesus often said things like "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." Or "to him who has more will be given, and he will have an abundance. But to him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away." [paraphrase].

I asked Facebook's Meta AI this question: Was the story of the film ET inspired by the story of Jesus?

Meta AI's answer:

While the story of E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) is not a direct retelling of the story of Jesus, there are some interesting parallels and similarities that have been noted by film analysts and scholars:

# Parallels between E.T. and Jesus:

1. *The Outsider*: Both E.T. and Jesus are outsiders who come to Earth (or a specific community) with a message of love and redemption.

2. *The Miracle Worker*: E.T. performs miraculous feats, such as healing Elliott's injured finger and reviving dead plants. Similarly, Jesus performs miracles, like healing the sick and raising the dead.

3. *The Pursuit and Persecution*: Both E.T. and Jesus are pursued by authorities who seek to harm or capture them. In E.T.'s case, it's the government scientists, while Jesus is pursued by the Roman authorities and Jewish leaders.

4. *The Sacrificial Love*: E.T. sacrifices himself to save Elliott, demonstrating a selfless love. Jesus, of course, sacrifices himself on the cross to redeem humanity.

5. *The Resurrection*: E.T. is revived and returns to life, much like Jesus' resurrection.

# Director Steven Spielberg's intentions:

While Spielberg hasn't explicitly stated that E.T. is a Jesus allegory, he has mentioned that he drew inspiration from his own childhood experiences and emotions, as well as classic fairy tales and myths.

Spielberg has also said that he aimed to create a story that would evoke a sense of wonder, magic, and redemption, which are all themes that are present in the story of Jesus.

# Conclusion:

While the story of E.T. is not a direct retelling of the story of Jesus, there are certainly some interesting parallels and similarities between the two. These parallels might be seen as a nod to the universal themes of love, sacrifice, and redemption that are present in many stories, including the story of Jesus.

Here's what Meta AI's answer to the apparentcontradiction:

This apparent contradiction has been debated by scholars and theologians. Here's a possible reconciliation:

*Understanding the context*:

- Mark 8:11-13: Jesus is responding to the Pharisees' request for a sign from heaven. Jesus refuses, saying no sign will be given to that generation.

- Matthew 12:38-42, 16:1-4, and Luke 11:29-32: Jesus is also responding to the Pharisees' request for a sign. However, in these accounts, Jesus mentions the "sign of Jonah" as the only sign that will be given.

*Reconciling the accounts*:

1. *Different emphases*: Mark focuses on Jesus' refusal to provide a sign, emphasizing the Pharisees' unbelief. Matthew and Luke, on the other hand, highlight the significance of the "sign of Jonah," which points to Jesus' resurrection.

2. *The "sign of Jonah" as an exception*: Jesus might be implying that the "sign of Jonah" is not a sign in the classical sense, but rather a prophetic foreshadowing of His resurrection. In this sense, the "sign of Jonah" is not a contradiction to Mark's account, but rather an additional clarification.

3. *Audience and purpose*: The accounts might be addressing different audiences or serving distinct purposes. Mark's Gospel tends to focus on Jesus' actions and teachings, while Matthew's Gospel emphasizes Jesus' fulfillment of Old Testament prophecies.

*Conclusion*:

While the accounts may seem contradictory at first glance, they can be reconciled by considering the different contexts, emphases, and purposes of each Gospel. The "sign of Jonah" is not necessarily a contradiction to Mark's account, but rather a complementary aspect of Jesus' teaching.