Contradiction with John 1:29
This verse refers to Jesus as "the Lamb of God," highlighting His innocence, which contrasts with the implication that He is guilty or a criminal as referred to as "the Just" in Acts 3:14.
John 1:29: The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. [taketh away: or, beareth]
Contradiction with Luke 23:4
Pilate states, "I find no fault in this man," contradicting Acts 3:14 where the people demanded Jesus be portrayed as guilty over "a murderer."
Luke 23:4: Then said Pilate to the chief priests and [to] the people, I find no fault in this man.
Contradiction with Matthew 27:4
Judas acknowledges, "I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood," emphasizing Jesus' innocence against the choice of a murderer in Acts 3:14.
Matthew 27:4: Saying, I have sinned in that I have betrayed the innocent blood. And they said, What [is that] to us? see thou [to that].
Contradiction with Isaiah 53:9
Describes how Jesus "had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth," opposing the decision in Acts 3:14 to deny "the Just" in favor of a criminal.
Isaiah 53:9: And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither [was any] deceit in his mouth. [death: Heb. deaths]
Contradiction with Hebrews 7:26
States that Jesus is "holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners," which contrasts with the choice of preferring a criminal over Him in Acts 3:14.
Hebrews 7:26: For such an high priest became us, [who is] holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens;
Contradiction with 1 Peter 2:22
Declares that Jesus "did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth," conflicting with the rejection of "the Just" described in Acts 3:14.
1 Peter 2:22: Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth:
Paradox #1
The contradiction, inconsistency, or conflict regarding Acts 3:14 generally involves the portrayal of public opinion and the crowd's choice. The verse depicts a situation where a crowd chooses to have a murderer released instead of an innocent man. Some critics point out this scenario may not fully align with historical records about the practices of Roman governance and Jewish customs at the time. However, such arguments are often speculative, as specific historical records from that period are limited. Furthermore, the discrepancy can stem from differing accounts within the Gospels about the events around the trial of Jesus, where variations exist in how the crowd's decision is described. This highlights potential inconsistencies in narrative details across different books.Overall, debates on this topic tend to be interpretative or theological rather than based on definitive historical evidence.