Jesus, Contradicted
An interactive breakdown of Dr. Mike Licona’s research on Greco-Roman biography conventions, Aelius Theon’s 4 paraphrase methods, and why differences across Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John are features of ancient literary craft—not evidence of fabrication.
▶ Watch Discussion with Sean McDowell (01:47:47)Aelius Theon's 4 Paraphrasing Methods
In the 1st century, the rhetorician Aelius Theon of Alexandria authored the Progymnasmata (preliminary compositional textbook) teaching students standard ways to recount stories and speeches [00:27:36].
1. Addition
Writers add clarifying remarks, background narrative, or theological context to help the reader understand deeper implications.
2. Subtraction
Omitting lengthy details, secondary characters, or intermediate steps for brevity without changing the historical crux.
3. Syntax Change
Transforming statements into rhetorical questions, changing word order, voice, or grammar to elevate the literary prose.
4. Creating Dialogue
Converting a long monologue or teaching block into a dynamic question-and-answer exchange between interlocutors.
Greco-Roman Compositional Devices
When comparing parallel accounts in Plutarch (48 surviving biographies) and Roman historians like Sallust & Tacitus, classicists discovered consistent compositional conventions that the Gospel authors also used [00:29:21].
Simplification & Abbreviation
Cutting out intermediaries or side characters so the primary protagonist directly interacts with the key figures.
Transferral
Attributing words or actions spoken by a group, representative, or messenger directly to the leader or protagonist (or vice versa).
Compression & Conflation
Compressing multi-stage events that took place across several days into a single dramatic encounter.
Chronological Displacement
Weaving known historical sayings or deeds into thematic or theological narrative slots rather than strictly following a calendar timeline [00:42:37].
Key Gospel Differences Unpacked
Click each case study to examine how standard ancient devices provide natural solutions where forced harmonization strains the text.
The apparent contradiction: Did the Roman Centurion speak to Jesus face-to-face, or did he never meet Jesus in person?
Luke 7:1–10
The Centurion sends Jewish elders to ask Jesus to come. Later, he sends friends to say, "Lord, do not trouble yourself, for I am not worthy..." Jesus heals the servant from afar without ever seeing the Centurion.
Matthew 8:5–13
Matthew simplifies the entire narrative by omitting both delegations and narrating the Centurion directly speaking with Jesus [00:06:27].
Licona's Resolution: Matthew employs the standard ancient device of simplification—just as Plutarch does when recounting Pompey's speeches [00:07:54]. In ancient communication, an emissary spoke on behalf of the authority; Matthew simply cuts to the core interaction.
The apparent contradiction: Did the heavenly voice address Jesus privately or proclaim His identity publicly to the crowd?
Mark 1:11 & Luke 3:22
God speaks directly to Jesus: "You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased." (2nd person singular address)
Matthew 3:17
God addresses the bystanders: "This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased." (3rd person public proclamation)
Licona's Resolution: Matthew paraphrases the divine voice to emphasize the public christological witness to his Jewish audience [00:49:48]. Augustine noted that Matthew altered the wording to make the message direct and personal to the reader.
The apparent contradiction: Who pronounces the sentence upon the wicked farmers who killed the vineyard owner's son?
Mark 12:9 & Luke 20:16
Jesus asks the rhetorical question and then gives the answer Himself: "What then will the owner of the vineyard do? He will come and destroy those tenants..."
Matthew 21:40–41
Jesus asks the question, and Matthew has the Jewish religious leaders deliver the damning response themselves [00:55:21].
Licona's Resolution: Matthew uses Theon's 4th paraphrase method (Creating Dialogue) to trap the critics in their own logic, turning a monologue into an active dramatic courtroom scene [00:52:14].
The Question: Why does Jesus speak cryptically in the Synoptics but proclaim explicit "I AM" statements in John (e.g. John 8:58)?
Licona & Johannine Scholars: Scholars like F.F. Bruce, Daryl Bock, and Craig Keener describe John as a "spiritual gospel" and a free theological translation [01:21:18]. John takes what Jesus claimed implicitly through His deeds, divine claims, and authority in Mark/Matthew/Luke and casts it into explicit poetic declarations (portrait vs. raw snapshot).
Historical Reliability & Inerrancy
How Dr. Licona navigates the relationship between biblical inspiration, ancient historiography, and core Christian doctrine.
Resurrection as the Keystone
Licona's baseline epistemic principle: If Jesus rose from the dead, Christianity is fundamentally true [00:01:42].
The historical fact of the Resurrection occurred decades before any Gospel was penned; differences in literary style or timeline sequencing cannot overturn the historical core.
J.I. Packer & The Chicago Statement
Licona recounts lecturing on these compositional devices to J.I. Packer (co-drafter of the 1978 Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy). Packer shook his hand and said: "Thanks, tops. Agreed with every word." [00:12:26]
Inerrancy must be judged by the author's intentional genre conventions, not modern 21st-century verbatim courtroom standards.
The "Two Slopes" Warning [01:41:54]
Licona cautions against brittle, "wooden" views of inerrancy: when Christians are taught that discovering even one minor stylistic discrepancy invalidates all of Scripture, encountering a genuine historical variation causes their entire faith framework to collapse down a steep cliff. Viewing the text through the lens of ancient biography preserves both academic integrity and spiritual vitality.
Test Your Knowledge
Check your understanding of Dr. Licona's arguments and Theon's paraphrase categories.