Mistakes Critics Make In Misjudging The Bible (Part 7)

Note: These are summarized compilations from the book, “When Critics Ask”, authored by Norman Geisler and Thomas Howe.

Assuming that Divergent Accounts Are False Ones

Just because two or more accounts of the same event differ, it does not mean they are mutually exclusive. For example, Matthew (28:5) says there was one angel at the tomb after the resurrection, whereas John informs us there were two (20:12). But these are not contradictory reports.

In fact, there is an infallible mathematical rule that easily explains this problem: wherever there are two, there is always one – it never fails! Matthew did not say there was only one angel. One has to add the word “only” to Matthew’s account to make it contradict John’s. But if the critic comes to the Bible in order to show it errs, then the error is not in the Bible, but in the critic.

Likewise, Matthew (27:5) informs us that Judas hanged himself. But Luke says that “he burst open in the middle and all his entrails gushed out” (Acts 1:18). Once more, these accounts differ, but they are not mutually exclusive. If Judas hanged himself on a tree over the edge of a cliff and his body fell on sharp rocks below, then his entrails would gush out just as Luke vividly describes.