Apparent Chronological Problems

Acts29 said:

Hello. I am new here so please forgive me if I don't do the multi quote function correctly.



Jesus came to John at the Jordan more than once. The first time was in the fall before the 40 days of fasting as recorded in Luke. Jesus returned to John after the fasting just before spring. That is when Simon, etc. followed Jesus back to Galilee as recorded in John. John the Baptist, bearing witness over a two day period, then recounted the testimony as written in John 1. John spoke about Jesus many times, but not every time needed to be recorded.



This is pretty easy actually. Quirinius was governor of Syria from 9-1 BC. He lost the job for a while and then got it back several years later. The same thing happens all the time in politics even today. It was during the 8 BC census that Mary was pregnant with Jesus. The 8 BC census is when the order was sent out though it took until the spring of 7 BC before they got to counting in far off Judea. Thus Jesus, the perfect Lamb, was born on the 10th day of the 1st month (Exodus 12) in 7 BC, exactly 62 sevens (Daniel 9) after Artaxerxes order to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem came in his 25th year (Nehemiah), 441 BC, just as prophesied in scripture.

The requirement for Jews to return to their home land was for two reasons. One, to exert control over an unruly people. Two, to have records to identify the location of agitators in Judea. It was like today's mask mandates. It is all about control to intimidate the righteous.



Check the original Greek on this. The word used in Luke is of an infant. In Matthew a different word is used which means a toddler around 2 years old. The wise men and Herod's pursuit of Jesus came well after His birth. That is why he ordered all males 2 years old and under to be killed. He wasn't looking for a newborn. Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the post and welcome to the forum.

Acts29 said:

Jesus came to John at the Jordan more than once. The first time was in the fall before the 40 days of fasting as recorded in Luke. Jesus returned to John after the fasting just before spring. That is when Simon, etc. followed Jesus back to Galilee as recorded in John. John the Baptist, bearing witness over a two day period, then recounted the testimony as written in John 1. John spoke about Jesus many times, but not every time needed to be recorded.

Click to expand...

I largely agree with this. The synoptic gospels mention the wilderness experience, then skip over the early ministry in Judaea, and go straight to Galilee and relate that part. John spends more time relating the in-between details. I have a paper and timeline about it. It also helps with the temple cleansing chronology problem.

Here is a link. https://www.5loaves2fishes.net/cleansing-of-the-temple
You might need a PC screen to read the timeline.

Why do 21st Century people reading documents that are two millennia old insist that they harmonize chronologically? They were not written in the modern journalistic style.

"So then, many other signs Jesus also performed in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; but these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name." John 20:30-31

pescador said:

… these have been written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that by believing you may have life in His name." John 20:30-31

Click to expand...

Sure, believing that Jesus is ‘The Christ’ is the core of the gospel. But faith can be shaken when skeptics and smart alecks present us with apparent contradictions. Bible chronology has been fertile ground for such attacks and often it is our young at universities who are the ones who bear the brunt.

That is why I believe we need to be ready to give credible answers to these questions. And there are credible answers.

Christian Gedge said:

Sure, believing that Jesus is ‘The Christ’ is the core of the gospel. But faith can be shaken when skeptics and smart alecks present us with apparent contradictions. Bible chronology has been fertile ground for such attacks and often it is our young at universities who are the ones who bear the brunt.

That is why I believe we need to be ready to give credible answers to these questions. And there are credible answers.

Click to expand...

I doubt that those forum participants who cite chronological "problems" are skeptics and smart alecks or are that the young at universities are the ones who bear the brunt.

pescador said:

I doubt that those forum participants who cite chronological "problems" are skeptics and smart alecks.

Click to expand...

What do you think they are, then?

Derf said:

What do you think they are, then?

Click to expand...

I repeat...

I doubt that those forum participants who cite chronological "problems" are skeptics and smart alecks or are that the young at universities are the ones who bear the brunt.

They simply disagree with you.

pescador said:

I repeat...

I doubt that those forum participants who cite chronological "problems" are skeptics and smart alecks or are that the young at universities are the ones who bear the brunt.

They simply disagree with you.

Click to expand...

No one said anyone on these forums were skeptics or smart alecks. But there would be people here who have children, or grandchildren, who might come into contact with such. They may have faithfully taught the Bible to their family and don’t want their faith to be undermined.

So, we ask questions and we give answers. Forums are good places to do that. The opening post was a valid concern and doesn’t need you to tell him that there are better things to talk about.

pescador said:

I repeat...

I doubt that those forum participants who cite chronological "problems" are skeptics and smart alecks or are that the young at universities are the ones who bear the brunt.

They simply disagree with you.

Click to expand...

Why do you think they cite chronological problems? I can think of 2 reasons.
1. they are seeking answers to seeming contradictions
2. they are pointing out the seeming contradictions because they realize contradictions undermine veracity.

Else there is no point in citing such problems.

Derf said:

Why do you think they cite chronological problems? I can think of 2 reasons.
1. they are seeking answers to seeming contradictions
2. they are pointing out the seeming contradictions because they realize contradictions undermine veracity.

Else there is no point in citing such problems.

Click to expand...

@pescador
That last part of #2 applies to #1 as well. “because they realize contradictions undermine veracity.”

Christian Gedge said:

No one said anyone on these forums were skeptics or smart alecks. But there would be people here who have children, or grandchildren, who might come into contact with such. They may have faithfully taught the Bible to their family and don’t want their faith to be undermined.

So, we ask questions and we give answers. Forums are good places to do that. The opening post was a valid concern and doesn’t need you to tell him that there are better things to talk about.

Click to expand...

You wrote this in post #44, "Sure, believing that Jesus is ‘The Christ’ is the core of the gospel. But faith can be shaken when skeptics and smart alecks present us with apparent contradictions. Bible chronology has been fertile ground for such attacks and often it is our young at universities who are the ones who bear the brunt."

pescador said:

You wrote this in post #44, "Sure, believing that Jesus is ‘The Christ’ is the core of the gospel. But faith can be shaken when skeptics and smart alecks present us with apparent contradictions. Bible chronology has been fertile ground for such attacks and often it is our young at universities who are the ones who bear the brunt."

Click to expand...

It could have been misunderstood. My apologies. Post #48 was written to clarify.

Jonaitis said:

In light of my previous thread, I have been investigating more into apparent discrepancies that most non-believers have propagated in an attempt to disunify the whole fabric of the inspired, inerrant and infallible Scripture.

Click to expand...

It's a ridiculous proposition. If Luke didn't date Quirinius correctly, then why should we think he must also be wrong about Jesus' sermon on the plain or Paul's trips? It doesn't follow. One time my wife [accidentally] said I was born one day later than my actual birth date. Does that mean she's now an unreliable source on any and all things under the sun? Of course not; one doesn't follow from the other; and thinking such a thing is silly. If Luke dated Quirinius wrong, what does that have to do with Isaiah or Mark?

Note this is a prior consideration to arguing the merits of Luke vs. Josephus' dating.

If one looks into Scripture with the intent of finding chronological problems s/he will undoubtedly find them. So either the dates are "wrong" or the chronology is misunderstood. As I have written earlier, the Bible is not modern Western journalism. The "books" of the Bible are written specifically so that spiritual message comes through "loud and clear".

For example, Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus going to the temple at Jerusalem and clearing the temple grounds at the end of His ministry, but John has Him going there much earlier. John put Jesus' going to the temple at the beginning to emphasize a specific spiritual message. The others put the event at the end to emphasize a specific spiritual message. So, which account is "correct"? All of them!

pescador said:

Matthew, Mark, and Luke have Jesus going to the temple at Jerusalem and clearing the temple grounds at the end of His ministry, but John has Him going there much earlier. John put Jesus' going to the temple at the beginning to emphasize a specific spiritual message.

Click to expand...

A common reply is that John's focus is theological, and his writings not intended to be followed in date order, but such an answer is inadequate. Wasn't the book of Galatians also theological in focus, yet it contains specific date information concerning the history of the early Church?

Temple Cleansing 'Contradiction'

Hi Jonaitis. Biblical chronolgy is a hobby of mine. Apparently the history is accurate only until we try to convert it into modern BC and AD time. It's like the oft debated Egyptian chronology. The biggest problem is that we are using translations of translations. We don't have the source Hebrew Gospel of Matthew. Or the source Aramaic Gospel of Mark, as Irenaeus mentions. Compare the Septuagint with the Masoretic. Timelines are hundreds of years apart.

The best explanation I have for these discrepancies is that figures of speech such as "after that" became incorrectly translated as "tomorrow". And I believe a large portion of the Bible, especially the NT, is missing. We really only have fragments. Often in the NT some Bible verse is quoted such as "it is written" without any accompanying OT verse! This can only mean that portion was lost or destroyed. Consider for example the Book of Iddo, the Book of the Wars of Yahweh, the Book of Baruch, and many more mentioned in the Bible that we do not have.

And the NT letters for example, seem like a dialogue between apostles and churches. But all we have are fragments in monologue.

My advice is not to be bothered about it. Because although Yahweh allows so much to be lost, He preserved the important parts, such as how to be saved.

Additionally, I don't see the Biblical Books as all equal in a sense. For example, something like the 10 Commandments was written by God's finger on stone tablets. This is most Holy. The Torah was written by Moses(and probably the end by Joshua). This is Holy. The Writings(Ketubim) were not typically written by prophets. These are more like history. Like Maccabees, Chronicles, and such. These are considered Holy Scripture but don't technically sit on the same level as the Prophets(Nebim) in my opinion. So if something in Chronicles differs from something in Kings, then Kings is the accurate record, because it was written by the prophets. Whereas Chronicles was compiled by Ezra, a scribe. Even in Maccabees often they mention not knowing what to do because there was no prophet to guide them.

As I say, Yeshua will fix everything when He returns.

Dates for the Roman leaders you mention are primarily based on eclipses that were recorded during certain events. We can calculate the possible years these events occured by looking at when eclipses happened. The problem is there were at least two eclipses during the reign of Herod I, and most people assume the first eclipse which gives the 4 BC date for his death. IIRC the later eclipse would put the dates forward and match up with the census you mention.

But on top of that, censuses and taxes may have been different events. For example, in preparing for war, a king wants to know how many men he has available of fighting age(census), but for taxes, he wants to know how many tax paying citizens he has, of either gender. The requirement to go to one's hometown to be taxed was likely due to property rights. In other words, come pay taxes on your property, or Rome will take it.
So a lot of people may not have shown up for the taxing, because they had no property to pay taxes on anyway. Thus, it wasn't a census but a taxing. A different event. Just like today, we pay taxes yearly, and we don't have a census yearly. These are different events.

So there's a lot of assumptions being made here. And the fact is we really don't know exactly when these events happened.

Jonaitis said:

Matthew states that toward the dawn of the first day, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary went to see the tomb. When they arrived, an earthquake occurred, and an angel descended and rolled back the stone and sat on it. After the angel announced what had happened, they fled to tell the disciples and on the way stumble into Jesus.

Mark states that very early on the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene, Mary the mother of James and Salome went to the tomb. When they arrived, the stone was already rolled back and they found a young man sitting inside. After the young man announced what happened, they fled and told no one.

Luke states that at early dawn of the first day, Mary Magdalene, Mary mother of James and Joanna and some other unnamed women went to the tomb and found the stone rolled away. While perplexed about this, two men stood next to them and frightened them. After the men announced what happened, they fled and told the "eleven and all the rest" (v. 24:9).

John states that early in the morning of the first day, while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene went to the tomb and saw the stone had been rolled away. She fled and went to Peter and John, and told them that someone had taken Jesus' body out of the tomb and hid it somewhere. Peter and John race to the tomb, and upon finding it empty they left. Mary begins to weep outside the tomb, and two angels appear inside the tomb. After they ask her a question, she replies that Jesus' body was stolen and then turns around to Jesus.

Now, you can try to play gymnastics with the text, but anyone reading these side by side can clearly see a pink elephant in the room. How do we reconcile these accounts? For example, did Mary Magdalene witness an angel descend from heaven and roll back the stone as Matthew states, or did she find it already rolled back upon arriving and thought the body of Jesus was stolen as John states? Did Mary leave to bring Peter before encountering Jesus at the tomb as John states, or did she encounter Jesus on the way to the disciple as Matthew states? This all happened around the same time - dawn of the first day. This wasn't a 9:00 AM and 2:00 PM difference.

Click to expand...

The Resurrection Gospel Accounts Explained:

#1. Matthew 28:2-4 is dealing with the angel of the Lord scaring away the guards before the women’s visit.
Matthew 28 primarily deals with the angel of the Lord appearing to the woman AFTER:


In Matthew 28: The women hear the angel of the Lord’s message and as they head out, they run into Jesus and grab his feet and worship Him.

#2. Mark 16 is one that I label as a possible scenario. For in order for this account in Mark to fit, it’s possible that after the women grabbed Jesus feet and worshiped him on their way to tell the disciples of what had happened, either all the women, or certain women (who did not enter the tomb) doubled back to Christ’s tomb to either see Jesus again, or to encounter an angel (i.e. to experience that which is Heavenly again).

#3. Luke 24 is like a broad brush stroke painting of a lot of the events involved (involving the perspective of all the women). Luke 24 helps us to see the women’s first entrance into the tomb to encounter the two standing angels (after Peter and John were the first to enter the tomb and leave). Luke 24 also helps us to see the end of this particular scene whereby the women fulfill their goal in telling all the 11 disciples (and others) of what had happened to them. Unfortunately, they did not believe the women; And Peter goes to Christ's tomb a second time wondering what was to happen next.

#4. John 20 is a beginning story involving the perspective from Mary Magdalene. It shows how she encountered the stone rolled away, and she went and told Peter and John with them visiting the tomb for the first time. But they head back home (with Peter in unbelief). John 20 also reveals Mary Magdalene’s exclusive encounter with Jesus (Who was the first person to see the risen Lord).

A great earthquake takes place, and the Angel of the Lord rolls the stone away and sits upon it scaring away the guards of Christ’s tomb:


Synoptic (Repeat) Gospel Occurrence:

On the end of the Sabbath at the first day of the week, when it is still dark, Mary Magdalene and the other women set out to the tomb of Christ, and they arrive at the sepulcher (tomb) when the sun dawns (or when the sun rises) and find the stone to the tomb is rolled away:


Mary Reports to Peter and John what has happened and they raced to Christ’s tomb. Peter and John enter the tomb (being the first ones to enter), but they end up just returning back home (seeing Peter did not believe):


The women decide to enter Christ’s tomb, and they encounter two men (angels) in shining garments standing who speak to them about the words of Christ:


Mary either does not appear to believe or she does understand the angel’s words; So she weeps for Jesus’ missing body. The angels ask why she is weeping, and she says that someone has taken away the Lord. Then Jesus appears to Mary and she wants to touch or hold on to Him. However, Jesus forbids it saying that He must yet still ascend to His Father:


Synoptic (or Repeat) statement in Mark:
Mary Magdalene encounter with the risen Jesus:


The angel of the Lord who rolled the stone away and sat upon it (Who scared away the guards of Christ’s tomb) returns again and speaks to the women:


The women hear the angel’s message and departedly quickly from the tomb to tell the disciples what the angel said. As the women are on the way to tell the disciples the message from the angel, Jesus appears to the women and they grab on to his feet and worshiped Him; Jesus then tells the women to speak to the disciples and tell them to go to Galilee where they will see Him:


The guards (who guarded Christ’s tomb) report back to the Chief Priests on what had happened:


Possible Scenario (That Fits the Events):

After the women encounter Jesus on the way to tell the disciples of the messages from the angel of the Lord, and the Lord Jesus Christ, certain women (or all of them) double back to Christ’s Tomb; When they enter the tomb, they encounter a young man (angel) sitting on the right side. In short, the angel tells them the same message that Jesus and the others have told them:

(Note 1: This may have happened due to the fact that these ladies did not enter the tomb with the other women, and they wanted to see the empty tomb for themselves. They also may have desired to see Jesus again, and or have an encounter with the angel like the others had reported).

(Note 2: Take notice of Mark 16:7 the words, “as he said unto you.” The young man (angel) tells the women of the same message given before by the other angels and ALSO by Christ (i.e. “as he said unto you.”); So this means that these women were the ones who encountered Jesus on their way to tell the disciples).


Mary tells the disciples that she has seen the Lord, but they cried over the loss of the Lord and did not believe her:


The women remembered the Lord’s words and having returned back to the sepulcher (Christ’s tomb), they told all these things to the eleven disciples and to all the rest. However, they did not believe them:


Peter heads back to Christ’s tomb and looks upon the clothes of Jesus in the tomb; He is left wondering to himself what was to come next:


I hope this chronology helps somebody today.

May God's grace, love, and good ways be upon you all.