How to Approach Difficult Bible Passages

Every Honest Reader Encounters Difficulty

If you read the Bible carefully and honestly, you will encounter passages that trouble you. Some seem to contradict other passages. Some describe God commanding violence. Some contain teachings that clash with modern moral sensibilities. Some are simply confusing, even the apostle Peter admitted that some of Paul's letters contained things "hard to understand" (2 Peter 3:16).

Encountering difficulty is not a sign of weak faith or poor reading, it is a sign of honest engagement. The alternative, reading the Bible selectively, skipping the hard parts, or pretending that everything is simple and clear, is a form of intellectual dishonesty that stunts spiritual growth. The great Bible scholars throughout history, Augustine, Aquinas, Calvin, Barth, all grappled publicly with difficult passages. Their willingness to wrestle with the text, rather than ignore the difficulties, produced the theological depth that continues to enrich the church.

Difficult passages generally fall into several categories. Apparent contradictions occur when two passages seem to make incompatible claims, did Judas hang himself (Matthew 27:5) or fall headlong and burst open (Acts 1:18)? Moral difficulties arise when the text describes or seems to approve of actions that modern readers find abhorrent, the conquest of Canaan, slavery regulations, imprecatory psalms calling for the destruction of enemies' children. Historical and scientific challenges occur when biblical claims seem to conflict with modern knowledge, the age of the earth, the global flood, the sun standing still (Joshua 10:13). Interpretive puzzles occur when the text is simply unclear, what does Paul mean by "baptism for the dead" (1 Corinthians 15:29)? Who are the Nephilim (Genesis 6:4)?

Each type of difficulty requires different tools and approaches, but all share a common starting principle: do not resolve the difficulty prematurely. Sit with it. Research it. Let it challenge your assumptions. The German poet Rilke advised a young writer to "live the questions", to dwell with unresolved questions rather than grasping for easy answers. This is wise counsel for Bible students facing difficult passages. Sometimes the difficulty dissolves with more information. Sometimes it deepens into a mystery that enriches rather than diminishes faith. Sometimes it remains genuinely unresolved, and the honesty of admitting that is itself a form of faithfulness.

Handling Apparent Contradictions

Apparent contradictions are among the most common difficulties readers encounter. How many angels were at the tomb, one (Matthew 28:2, Mark 16:5) or two (Luke 24:4, John 20:12)? Did Jesus cleanse the temple at the beginning (John 2:13-17) or end (Matthew 21:12-13) of his ministry? Did Paul's companions hear the voice on the Damascus road (Acts 9:7) or not (Acts 22:9)?

Before assuming a genuine contradiction, consider several possibilities. First, the accounts may describe the same event from different perspectives, each including details the other omits. Matthew mentions one angel at the tomb; Luke mentions two. These are not contradictory, if there were two, there was certainly one. Matthew focuses on the angel who spoke; Luke mentions both who were present. This principle of selective reporting applies to many apparent discrepancies in the Gospels.

Second, the accounts may describe different events that bear surface similarities. Many scholars believe Jesus cleansed the temple twice, once at the beginning and once at the end of his ministry, just as he fed large crowds twice (the 5,000 and the 4,000). What looks like a contradiction may be two distinct events.

Third, apparent contradictions in numbers, names, and minor details may reflect differences in source material, oral tradition, or scribal transmission. Ancient historiography operated by different conventions than modern journalism. Ancient historians felt free to paraphrase speeches, approximate numbers, and arrange material thematically rather than chronologically. Judging ancient texts by modern journalistic standards creates problems that the original authors and audiences would not have recognized.

Fourth, some apparent contradictions dissolve when you understand the original languages. The discrepancy about Paul's companions on the Damascus road involves a grammatical distinction in Greek: Acts 9:7 uses the genitive case ("they heard the voice", perceived the sound), while Acts 22:9 uses the accusative case ("they did not hear the voice", did not understand the words). The companions heard noise but did not comprehend the message.

Fifth, some tensions are intentional. The Bible is not a single-author monograph but a library of diverse voices. When Proverbs 26:4 says "Do not answer a fool according to his folly" and the very next verse (26:5) says "Answer a fool according to his folly," the contradiction is deliberate, wisdom requires discernment about when each approach is appropriate. The tension is the point.

When you have researched a contradiction and a reasonable explanation exists, accept it provisionally. When no explanation satisfies you, hold the question openly. Some questions have not yet been resolved, and the intellectual honesty of admitting uncertainty is more mature than the premature certainty of a forced harmonization.

Engaging Morally Difficult Texts

The morally difficult passages are often the hardest to discuss because they touch on deeply personal convictions about justice, compassion, and the character of God. The conquest of Canaan (the command to destroy entire populations in Deuteronomy 7:1-2 and Joshua 6-11), Old Testament slavery regulations, patriarchal social structures, and imprecatory psalms calling for violence against enemies all present genuine challenges that deserve thoughtful engagement rather than dismissal or rationalization.

Several principles can guide your engagement with these texts. First, read them in their historical context. Ancient Near Eastern warfare was universally brutal by modern standards. The "ban" (Hebrew: cherem), the devotion of a conquered city and its inhabitants to total destruction, was practiced by other ancient Near Eastern cultures as well (the Moabite Stone records King Mesha doing the same thing to Israelite towns). This does not make the practice morally acceptable to modern readers, but it places the biblical texts within a world that operated by different norms. The Bible's war narratives emerged from and addressed a world very different from our own.

Second, consider the trajectory of Scripture. The Old Testament begins with extensive warfare and gradually develops a vision of universal peace: "They will beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not take up sword against nation, nor will they train for war anymore" (Isaiah 2:4). Jesus radicalizes this trajectory: "Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you" (Matthew 5:44). Some scholars argue that the moral trajectory, from accommodation to ancient norms toward the full revelation of God's character in Christ, is more important than any single point along the trajectory. The question is not just "What did the text say then?" but "Where is the text pointing?"

Third, distinguish between description and prescription. The Bible describes many actions, violence, deception, polygamy, slavery, without necessarily endorsing them. When Judges records a series of increasingly horrifying events (culminating in the gang rape and dismemberment of a woman in Judges 19), the narrator's repeated refrain, "In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did as they saw fit" (Judges 21:25), is a clear moral judgment: this is what happens when there is no accountability to God's standards. The description serves as a warning, not a model.

Fourth, acknowledge that some difficulties may not have fully satisfying answers within our current understanding. The conquest narratives, in particular, have generated centuries of debate among thoughtful, faithful scholars, and no single approach commands universal agreement. Some emphasize hyperbolic language (the "total destruction" language may be ancient Near Eastern rhetoric rather than literal reporting). Some emphasize the unique, unrepeatable nature of the conquest as a specific divine judgment on specific Canaanite sins (Genesis 15:16). Some emphasize the trajectory reading described above. All of these approaches have strengths and limitations.

Holding difficult texts honestly, neither dismissing them as irrelevant nor defending them uncritically, is a mark of mature engagement with a text that takes the full complexity of the human situation seriously.

Tools and Resources for Difficult Passages

When you encounter a difficult passage, several tools can help you move from confusion to clarity, or at least to informed uncertainty.

Commentaries are your first stop. A good commentary will identify the difficulty (confirming that you are not the only one who noticed it), survey the major interpretive options, evaluate the evidence for each option, and recommend a conclusion. Consult commentaries from different traditions, as each tradition tends to handle certain difficulties differently. For morally challenging Old Testament passages, commentaries by Walter Brueggemann (mainline Protestant), Tremper Longman (evangelical), and the Jewish Publication Society commentary series offer distinct perspectives.

Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias provide background information that often dissolves apparent difficulties. Many problems arise from importing modern assumptions into ancient texts. When you understand ancient Near Eastern customs, first-century social dynamics, or Hebrew literary conventions, passages that seemed problematic often make clear sense.

Cross-references and parallel passages show how other biblical authors handled the same topic. When Psalm 137:9 shocks you with its blessing on those who dash Babylon's infants against rocks, reading it alongside Romans 12:19 ("Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath") and Jesus' teaching on enemy love (Matthew 5:44) places the psalm within a canonical conversation about justice and forgiveness. The psalm expresses raw human emotion; the New Testament redirects that emotion toward trust in divine justice rather than personal vengeance.

Biblexika's Hard Verses feature specifically addresses the Bible's most frequently questioned passages, providing historical context, scholarly interpretive options, and cross-references that illuminate the difficulty from multiple angles. This is an excellent starting point for any passage that troubles you.

Original language tools sometimes resolve difficulties that are artifacts of translation. When the KJV says God "repented" of making Saul king (1 Samuel 15:11), the Hebrew word "nacham" does not carry the moral connotation of the English word "repent" (as in repenting of sin). It means "to grieve" or "to be sorry", God was grieved that Saul had failed, not confessing wrongdoing. Many apparent theological problems are translation problems.

Finally, community is a powerful tool for difficult passages. Bring your questions to a study group, a pastor, or a trusted friend who studies the Bible seriously. Other people's perspectives often illuminate dimensions of the text that you missed, and the communal practice of wrestling with difficulty together is both intellectually productive and relationally bonding.

Growing Through Difficulty

The greatest Bible students are not those who find everything easy but those who let the difficulties drive them deeper. Every apparent contradiction you research teaches you about ancient literary conventions, manuscript traditions, and interpretive methods. Every morally challenging passage you engage honestly teaches you about historical context, ethical reasoning, and the complexity of divine-human interaction. Every confusing prophecy or obscure symbol teaches you about literary genre, canonical development, and the limits of human understanding.

Jacob's wrestling match with God at Peniel (Genesis 32:22-32) is an apt metaphor for this process. Jacob wrestled all night, refusing to let go even when injured. At dawn, the divine figure asked, "What is your name?", a question that required Jacob to acknowledge who he really was (Jacob, the deceiver). Only after that honest self-reckoning did he receive a blessing and a new name: Israel, "one who strives with God." The name given to God's people is literally "God-wrestler." Wrestling with the text, honestly, persistently, even painfully, is not a deviation from faith. It is the very essence of the kind of faith the Bible describes.

Develop a "questions file" where you record the difficulties you encounter along with any partial answers you have found. Review this file periodically. You will be surprised how many questions that seemed insoluble six months ago now have at least partial answers, answers that came through continued study, new resources, conversations with others, or simply the passage of time and accumulated experience.

Be wary of two extremes. The first extreme is defensive fundamentalism, the reflex that immediately produces a pat answer for every difficulty, refusing to acknowledge that some questions are genuinely hard. This approach may provide temporary comfort but stunts intellectual and spiritual growth. The second extreme is dismissive skepticism, the assumption that every difficulty disproves the Bible's reliability, leading to a progressive abandonment of trust in the text. Both extremes avoid the hard work of honest, patient, persistent engagement.

The healthiest posture is one of honest faith seeking understanding, trusting that the text is worth wrestling with while acknowledging that some questions may not be resolved in this lifetime. As Paul wrote, "For now we see only a reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully" (1 Corinthians 13:12). Partial knowledge is not no knowledge, and the honesty of admitting what you do not yet understand is itself a form of intellectual and spiritual integrity.