You're joking, right? Can you answer any of these questions correctly?
I'll certainly try. I don't have the answers to everything in Scripture but I certainly can appreciate a challenge. My fear is that this was probably a general list that you got from the internet somewhere and not the result of your own dedicated research. As a result, I fear you may not be interested in my answers and will instead find a quick way to brush them off. I guess we shall see.
NOTE: I do wish you had at least added references in them so I didn't have to take all the time to find these supposed "contradictions" before even being able to answer them.
How many men were in Jesus' tomb when the women arrived? 1 or 2
This one isn't too difficult to explain. Luke and Mark both describe the angel as being a man while Matthew and John both describe it as the angel that it was. However, notice that it is Luke and John that speak of 2 "people" while it is Matthew and Mark that only speak of 1. There is all sorts of crisscrossing going on here. Of course, it isn't abnormal for the Bible to speak of angels as men. The point to look at here is not the amount of angels but rather, the angel being focused on. Luke and John both refer to there being 2 angels while Matthew and Mark choose to focus on the "lead" angel who does the talking. This is actually fairly normal in any person's recount of a story even today. One witness might describe the scene in general while another witness may choose to highlight certain facts.
I like how Norman Geisler puts it: "Matthew does not say there was only one angel. John says there were two, and wherever there are two there is always one; it never fails! The critic has to add the word
"only” to Matthew’s account in order to make it contradictory. But in this case, the problem is not with what the Bible actually says, but with what the critic adds to it."
On the way to Golgotha where Jesus was to be crucified, who carried his cross? Only Jesus or Simon of Cyrene?
This is not a contradiction at all. He did carry his own cross. John merely omits the point of how he was helped at a later point. Notice that the entire passage is less detailed than the other Gospel accounts. Again, this is more a matter of how detailed the author is being and not a matter of contradiction.
When Jesus sent His disciples out to spread the Gospel to the cities of Israel, did He tell them to take only a staff or to take no staff?
Between Matthew, Mark, & Luke, at face value, there does appear to be a contradiction. However, when you look at the bigger picture, you can see the point is not in what they are bringing but in how they are trusting God. They were not to take anything but the clothes on their back and a staff which was customary in that day. They were not to take 2 tunics, 2 pairs of sandals, or acquire another staff. The context clearly shows it is more than 1 that they are not supposed to bring and even Matthew points out that they are to not
acquire a staff. In fact, even the KJV uses the word in the plural sense. They were to take what they had and trust God on their journey.
When Jesus and His disciples were walking toward Jerusalem after leaving Bethany that night, Jesus saw a fig tree and cursed it for not having figs. Did the tree wither immediately as they stood and watched, or did it wither over night?
If you compare Matthew and Mark, there actually appear to be 2 separate visits into the city. Matthew gives the condensed version whereas Mark gives the full on version. Mark speaks of the fig tree being cursed, them leaving the city, and then seeing the fig tree withered as they went back into the city. Just because Matthew uses the phrase "at once" does not necessarily mean an instantaneous action at that very moment. This confusion stems from the very fact that Matthew's account is the "abridged" version. "At once" was a relative term. Peter saw a tree that was perfectly healthy and then the next morning it was all of a sudden (at once) withered to the roots.
How many women went to Jesus' tomb on Sunday morning? One or more than one?
In Matthew, Mary and Mary Magdalene went. In Mark, it was Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Salome. In Luke, they are simply referred to as "the women." In John, it refers to Mary yet then says Mary Magdalene a few verses later. In John, this could either be referring to Mary and Mary Magdalene or it could be just Mary Magdalene being mentioned. There is no way to know for sure. However, none of this matters. Where there is "Mary and Mary Magdalene," there is surely Mary Magdalene. Where there is "Mary, Mary Magdalene, and Salome," there is surely Mary and Mary Magdalene. Again, this is not a contradiction but a matter of exposed detail. In much the same way, John describes Mary as weeping whereas the other accounts do not. Would any skilled debater count this a contradiction as well? Of course not!
After Jesus calmed the sea, He and His disciples went to a land called Gadarenes (Gergesenes, in Matt). How many demon-possessed men came out of the tombs? 1 or 2?
There were 2. Again, where there are 2, there is undoubtedly one. Yet another matter of detail where the author chose to focus on the more dominant one doing the speaking.
When Jesus rode into Jerusalem, was he riding one donkey or two?
He was riding one donkey but there were 2 in attendance. This is a fulfillment of the prophecy found in Zechariah 9:9. The mother donkey was there possibly to console her offspring who had never been ridden (Mark 11:2). Either way, Matthew 21 does not say Jesus rode 2 donkeys. It says the garments were placed on 2 donkeys and then he sat on the garments (of the colt). Just because the garments were placed on both donkeys does not mean he was sitting on every garment on every donkey all at the same time. This is quite the awkward picture to be honest.
How did Judas die? Suicide or did his guts fall out in a field he bought with the silver?
Both. It appears as if the tree in which he hung himself was on the lot of the field he bought and was overlooking a cliff. More than likely, the rope or branch snapped causing him to fall to the rocks below. This isn't a contradiction but rather, one account complimenting the other.
How many days after Jesus' resurrection did He ascend into Heaven? 1 or 40?
First, Matthew and John don't really give any real info on this. That leaves Mark and Luke. However, it is in Acts 1:3 where it says 40 days. Before going any further, we should also note that the text in Mark cannot really be used. The oldest and most reliable manuscripts do not contain Mark 16:9-20. Because of this (and many other reasons), we cannot form doctrine from those verses because they were probably added in at a later point. This leaves only Luke. Considering it was Luke who wrote both Luke & Acts, we don't really have to wonder if there is a contradiction between 2 authors. It was clearly just his style in which he wrote each of them.
When did Satan enter Judas? At the last supper or several days before?
All of the above. John 13:2 brings us to the feast. However, it says that the devil had
already put the plan to betray Jesus into Judas' heart. In Luke 22:3, Satan himself possessed Judas when he went to speak with the chief priests. In John 13:27, Judas was again possessed by Satan at the feast. Again, both Luke and John compliment each other. Luke says it happened days prior. John not only says it happened at the feast but that it had also occurred days prior.
When Jesus was being crucified, were the women standing at the foot of the Cross, near enough to speak to Him, or were they watching from afar?
We know there were many women who had come to the crucifixion. It is apparent that Mary and John had gone up close at some point while the others stayed back.
Did both of the criminals who were crucified with Jesus revile Him, or did only one?
From the looks of things, they were probably both reviling him and then one of them repented shortly thereafter.
Who was Jesus' grandfather on his father's side? Heli or Jacob?
Jacob was his blood grandfather. Heli was his grandfather-in-law. Luke does not have any women in his genealogy in chapter 3 so he substitutes Joseph for Mary. This is technically not incorrect as, like I stated, Heli was Joseph's father through marriage.
According to Jesus, is it Ok to call someone a fool?
I can only assume you are referring to Jesus' condemnation in Matthew 5:22 versus his calling people blind fools in 23:17. The term for fool literally meant empty headed. In Matthew 5:22, he was speaking of the big picture of anger being equated to murder. This was an unrighteous anger that we feel as fallen sinners. Jesus was not telling us by simply saying the word fool, we will be condemned to Hell. He was speaking of the dangers of hatred in our heart toward our fellow brother. Full context clearly shows this. As for 23:17, this was a righteous anger on the part of Jesus. He did not hate the people but absolutely hated what they stood for and hated their blindness. Being that Jesus was God, he knew the hearts of every man and hated sin. No contradiction there.
How many blind men did Jesus heal on His way out of Jericho? 1 or 2?
Simply another case of detail versus lack of detail and where the author chose to place his focus.
What did Jesus drink while He was up on the cross? Vinegar and gall? Or wine and myrrh?
Matthew calls it wine and gall while Mark calls it wine and myrrh. Gall simply meant that it was something bitter. Myrrh was a numbness inducing agent that was often mixed in with wine and given to crucifixion victims so that they would not struggle as much. Even in Proverbs 31:6, it says to give strong drink to those who are perishing. Again, there is no contradiction here.
What did Jesus do immediately after His baptism?
Again, this comes down to writing style. Mark uses the word "immediately" more than the other 3 Gospels combined. It was all a part of his writing style which kept readers at a fast pace. This kept in line with his target audience being the fast paced and action-oriented Romans.
What did the women who visited the tomb and found Him risen do? Run and tell? or Run and hide?
There are many possibilities here. Notice that it never really says they told the disciples in Matthew. It says they ran to tell them but it never says they actually did tell him. This could mean they never really did at all or, perhaps, they told later on. However, there is the question of why would they run to tell if they were so afraid that they didn't want to tell anybody. Remember, there were multiple women there. It could have been that Matthew focused on the women who went to tell whereas Mark focused on the women who were afraid. There is no way for us to know for sure.
