Answer needed for Muslims - Bible Contradictions,

Knowing that there IS an answer and that I just don’t happen to know what it is…I’ll ask it here.

I’m being confronted by Muslims about the numerous contradictions in the Bible, I’ve done some research & as it turns out most of these contradictions DO exist in translations of the Bible, BUT NOT in the Catholic NAB Bible posted on the Vatican’s website. I’ve been able to respond that those other Protestant Translations even the “Catholic Versions” of those Protestant Translations have been done outside the Christ’s Church so that is why it is possible to find errors in them;

HOWEVER, there are some contradictions in our Catholic NAB Bible which I KNOW our Catholic Church has the answer for, but I don’t know it:

In the Gospel of Matthew 27:27-28 - the Holy Spirit through Matthew says the soldiers placed on Jesus a SCARLET military cloak

In the Gospel of Mark 15:16-17 - the Holy Spirit through Mark says the soldiers clothed Jesus in PURPLE

In the Gospel of John 19:2 - the Holy Spirit through John says the soldiers placed on Jesus a PURPLE cloak

In the Gospel of Luke 23: 11- the Holy Spirit through the Luke doesn’t mention it which color the cloak was, which is fine since not every book says every little iota of what went on

The problem lies in when the color IS mentioned there are 2 completely different colors of the cloak described, which even *if *the true author of the Bible were merely human and Not God the Holy Spirit, the colors Scarlet Red and Purple can’t be confused for each other. Yet we Catholics all Know that the Bible was truly authored by God the Holy Spirit through the human authorship of those He has chosen through out Biblical history.

I need help - where do I find the Catholic Church’s answer to this question?

Our Catholic Church clearly teaches the inerrancy of the Bible in Dei Verbum, Providentissimus Deus, Divino Afflante Spiritu & the Catechism of the Catholic Church, so I need help in finding out how our Church does not consider this an error.

How & where does the Church officially explain this color of the cloak discrepancy?
I can’t wait to give these Muslims a strong answer as they were led away from Christianity to Islam because they had no answer to the so-called Biblical errors. :slight_smile:

Where are these Muslims from? Are they under the threat of death if they convert to Christianity?

P.S. Purple was a royal color, worn by Jewish priests.

It’s produced through a chemical change in the crushed shells of a mollusk, brought on by exposure to sunlight.


What’s the significance of the color?

Inerrancy does not mean that every little detail will be exact.

When people don’t want to discuss the hard truths about their own religion, they settle for wrestling around in the weeds - or colors - in this instance.

Really, this is rather a small issue, my friend. Scarlet and purple are basically the same colour, for goodness’ sake. The fact that the Gospels are different on trivial counts like these actually points to their trustworthiness. It shows that the Evangelists didn’t necessarily form a conspiracy to write exactly-verbatim Gospels to brainwash people with. :slight_smile:

"Few, however, comment on the relationship of the colors to one another or why these three specific colors were to be used.

The Torah: A Women’s Commentary (ed. Tamara Cohn Eskenazi and Andrea L. Weiss [New York: URJ Press, 2008], p. 453) states,“These three colors are probably listed in order of costliness,” an echo of the listing of precious metals, although no source is given for this assumption.

I would suggest that the colors have two levels of meaning, both implying the need for separation and unity:

The colors allude to the masculine and feminine aspects.

Red is often associated with women. The color of blood, it is naturally connected with a woman’s cycle.

Blue, the color of the single string of the tallit, was traditionally worn only by men.

And purple? It is the mixture of the two together–a reminder that it is not only the unique ways we seek God, but also what we share in our search that is important.

These colors relate to the Divine, the human, and the covenantal bond between them. As indicated above, blue is often associated in Jewish sources with God. The color of the sea and sky, it is a reminder of the grandeur and spaciousness of the universe.

Red (adom) is connected to the earth (adamah) to which we as humans (b’nei adam) are inextricably rooted.

And purple? Again, it’s emblematic of where God and we"meet."

The concept of separateness and unity symbolized by these colors is also an allusion to Creation–on the one hand is the unity and uniqueness of man and woman, and on the other the unbridgeable gap between God and ourselves, yet there is a covenantal bond possible between us.

Just as Moses takes note of the Burning Bush, so the color purple, then, may have its place in the Mishkan and clothing of the ancient priests so that people will"notice it."

The moment of individual revelation of Moses, which leads to the redemption of the people of Israel, is emblemized in a color to inspire all the people.

Every detail of the Mishkan, then, is a reminder to our ancestors, and to us, that Creation is an ongoing reality and redemption an ever-present possibility. Even as we seek those sacred moments from our own unique perspective, we should do so realizing that our lives are tightly woven in relationship to God and to others.

Rabbi Irwin A. Zeplowitz is senior rabbi at The Community Synagogue in Port Washington, New York. He has taught at Kolel: The Adult Centre for Liberal Jewish Learning in Toronto, JLearn on Long Island, and the URJ Kallah. He is immediate past president of the Alumni Association of Hebrew Union College-Jewish Institute of Religion and was chair of the Joint Commission on Sustaining Rabbinic Education."

P.S. Ask your Muslim friend how logical it is to say that our Sacred Scripture is wrong when their take on Christianity and Judaism was developed in 650 A.D.

The United States. They are American Citizens. No, they are not under any threat of death if they revert back to Christianity.

From the website:

"Shrinking Violet

The most surprising thing about purple is that it does not exist objectively.

That is to say, there’s no single wavelength of light that can properly be called “purple”; humans only perceive purple when a mixture of blue light and red light hits their retinas.

This seemingly counterintuitive fact makes more sense if you look at a spectrum; you’ll notice that red is on one end and blue is close to the other end. There’s no point where the two overlap to form an intermediate shade, unlike the green that appears between yellow and blue.

Spectrally speaking, you can’t have a single wavelength that is a “reddish blue” or a “bluish red.”

But what about violet?

Violet has its own band on the spectrum, on the other side of blue—and isn’t violet just another name for purple? Well…yes and no. Technically, the poem is correct: “Violets are blue.”

Violet is really nothing more than a very dark shade of blue, just as indigo is a light shade.

By definition, violet can’t have any red in it, even though we commonly talk as though it does.

Frustratingly, dictionaries are misleading on this subject. In Webster’s Revised Unabridged Dictionary, one of the definitions of violet is “a color produced by a combination of red and blue in equal proportions; a bluish purple color,” while in the same dictionary purple is defined similarly as “[a] red and blue color.”

True enough, you can mix red and blue paint or pigment and see purple, but if you’re going to be nitpickingly accurate, you can’t call any mixture of red and blue “violet,” and you must be willing to accept that what you see as “purple” is really an illusion created in your brain.

Purple Reigns

That’s not to say that purple (illusory though it may be) doesn’t appear in nature.

According to an ancient Roman legend, in about 1500 B.C., Hercules was walking his sheepdog on the beach one day. After biting into a mollusk, the dog’s mouth turned an unusual color. The mollusk, known as murex, was the first source of purple dye for fabrics—a pigment called Tyrian purple.

The process by which the coloring agent was extracted, which required salt, heat, and water, was difficult and labor-intensive.

In addition, each mollusk produced such a small quantity of dye that thousands were needed for a single garment.

This is why purple was so expensive and came to be associated with royalty—generally the only people who could afford such extravagance.

As recently as the mid-1800s, purple dye was still very hard to come by. Fabric dyes, based as they were on plant and animal products, for the most part produced colors that were bland and subject to fading. Synthetic dyes were invented by a happy accident."

Continues at:

Inerrancy does mean that there is not a single error large or small in the Bible and this is what the Catholic Church has always taught.

Some quotes from our Church’s official documents relating the complete inerrancy of the Bible can be found

Our Church has an answer for the color discrepancy without calling it an error, we just need to know what that answer is.

The inerrancy of the Bible is a major truth of our Catholic Church.

These Muslims I know took their Christian faith extremely seriously. One was a Catholic Nun for decades and the other a Christian Pastor for over 30 yrs. When they were confronted with perceived errors in the Bible, they began searching for answers and did not find them and eventually converted to Islam.

In light of the Catholic teaching of the inerrancy of the Bible, finding multiple perceived errors is a Huge Issue. Please don’t make light of their situation.

I believe that the Catholic Church has the answer and we need to learn what it is and share it with our fallen away brothers and sisters.

While we are waiting for a specific answer for this question (it may require looking at the original greek texts and translating the words for “scarlet” and “purple” literally) go ahead and search for “contradictions in the quran” . That will keep them busy while you find the other answers. :slight_smile:

What is the difference between purple and violet? What is the difference between pink and rose? What is the difference between brown, maroon and dark red?

Different people can use different but still close enough words to describe the same thing.

The inerrancy of the Bible is not a small issue.

Scarlet & Purple are very different colors, but the real issue is the perceived error - the cloak was either Scarlet or it was Purple only one could possibly be true. If you are saying that God allowed the writers of the Gospels to make trivial errors then I must tell you that the idea that any errors can be found in the Bible is not in line with the teachings of the Catholic Church.

Our Catholic Church teaches that there are NO errors large or small in the Bible. This may seem like a small matter to you, but according to our Catholic teachings there are supposed to be no errors at all in the Bible.

The Catholic Church has the answer, now we need to know what it is so it can be shared with our brothers & sisters.

Ignoring the issue of errors they have found in the Bible, the primary issue that caused them to leave Christianity, and instead of address that issue, making accusations against their faith would Not help them overcome their issues so they could come back to Christianity. Think about it.

This is a case called the multiple attestation point, and it one of the criteria to show that the document has historical validity. The different description of similar colors makes perfect sense because two different people usually give slightly different descriptions of the same item. I would be much more concerned if documents from different people were identical.

There is a big difference between discrepancy and error. If someone is so picky about the difference between purple and scarlet the same person would negate the fact that we have been created because of Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2.

BTW The Muslims chose to follow a false prophet that used gnostic theology to invent his own religious documents for political and personal gain.

I will have to do that, but before that could even be discussed, they deserve the valid answer.

They have actually shown me several You Tube Videos on the many miracles that are found in the Quran things that there is no possible way that a human being could have possibly have known in the 7th century. Learning about the miracles has led me to believe that it could only be a demon who could have revealed the Quran to Muhammad becayse I know that the Catholic Church is the true faith and God would not have made those revelations which contradict His prior revelations. The information in the Quran is clearly not of this world.

“One was a Catholic Nun for decades and the other a Christian Pastor for over 30 yrs.”

Ugh :shrug:

And, they think the Quran is factual?

Muslims believe that Abraham was sacrificing Ishmael.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit