Welcome to “Ehrman Errs,” a blog series devoted to using our conversational AI to refute each alleged biblical contradiction that is posed in the article on Bart Ehrman’s website: 50 Contradictions in the Bible: The Biggest, Most Shocking Differences.
Today’s alleged contradiction:
#28 – Gamaliel’s Speech in Acts Among the inconsistencies in the Bible
Gamaliel’s Speech in Acts Among the inconsistencies in the Bible, one stands out! In Acts 5:34-39, Gamaliel, a Pharisee, refers to Theudas and Judas the Galilean as examples of failed revolutionary leaders. However, this raises a historical issue, as Josephus, the Jewish historian, places Theudas after Judas the Galilean, suggesting that Luke (the author of Acts) may have confused the chronological order.
How Does Ehrman Err?
Bart Ehrman’s argument relies on the assumption that the “Theudas” mentioned in Acts 5:36 is the same individual Josephus later records in Antiquities of the Jews (20.97–98). However, a closer historical and textual analysis shows that this is almost certainly not the case. Let us respond carefully, combining historical evidence, biblical context, and sound reasoning.
1. Scriptural Account: Gamaliel’s Speech
In Acts 5:34–39 (ESV), Gamaliel—a highly respected Pharisee and teacher of the Law—warns the Sanhedrin to proceed cautiously in persecuting the apostles:
“For before these days Theudas rose up, claiming to be somebody, and a number of men, about four hundred, joined him. He was killed, and all who followed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After him Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away some of the people after him. He too perished, and all who followed him were scattered.” (Acts 5:36–37)
Gamaliel points to two past uprisings—Theudas and Judas the Galilean—to illustrate that false movements die when their leaders die. The context is around 30–35 A.D., shortly after Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection.
2. Historical Evidence: Two Different Theudases
Josephus recorded a Theudas who led a revolt during the governorship of Fadus (A.D. 44–46)—about a decade after Gamaliel’s speech. That Josephus mentions a Theudas some ten years later does not mean there was only one man by that name. “Theudas” (a Greek form of “Theodorus,” meaning “gift of God”) was a common name in first-century Judea.
According to GotQuestions.org (“Who was Theudas in the Bible?”):
“The Theudas that Gamaliel mentions is a different Theudas from the one appearing in Josephus’ Antiquities of the Jews. The Theudas Josephus describes would have been killed sometime between AD 44 and 46, and the Theudas mentioned in Acts 5 met his fate much earlier. Theudas was one of a long line of false messiahs that Jesus warned about (Mark 13:6).”
Thus, Acts 5 records an earlier, lesser-known Theudas, while Josephus refers to a later, more famous insurgent of the same name.
3. Chronological Consistency: Gamaliel’s Order Makes Sense
Gamaliel says, “After him Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census.”
Josephus, for his part, dates the Judas the Galilean revolt to the census ordered by Quirinius in A.D. 6–7. Therefore:
- Gamaliel’s “Theudas” would fall before A.D. 6,
- Judas the Galilean around A.D. 6–7,
- and Theudas the later Josephus describes around A.D. 45.
The chronology in Acts 5 is perfectly reasonable if we simply recognize that there were multiple men named Theudas. No historical contradiction is necessary.
4. Josephus as Corroborating Witness, Not Opponent
Interestingly, Josephus—as explored in Josephus and Jesus by T. C. Schmidt—had direct connections to the Sanhedrin and the early Christian context. The work notes that leading Pharisees like Gamaliel (Acts 5:34) were active at the time of Jesus and the early church (Schmidt, Josephus and Jesus,pp. 172–173).
This supports Luke’s accuracy in recording Gamaliel’s moderate stance and detailed historical memory.
5. Spiritual Lesson in Context
Gamaliel’s warning is less about chronology and more about discernment. He counsels that if the apostles’ movement is from man, it will fail; if it is of God, no one can stop it (Acts 5:39). Time has proven him right—despite persecution, the gospel continued to spread, as seen in Acts 5:42:
“And every day, in the temple and from house to house, they did not cease teaching and preaching that the Christ is Jesus.”
6. Conclusion: No Contradiction, Only Context
Therefore:
- The Theudas of Acts 5 is not the Theudas of Josephus’ Antiquities 20.
- Gamaliel’s chronological order fits the historical situation of the early 1st century.
- The book of Acts remains a reliable, historical account, consistent with both Jewish and Roman history.
Key Scripture Support
- Acts 5:38–39 – Gamaliel’s wise counsel about movements of God
- Mark 13:6 – Jesus’ warning about many false messiahs
- Luke 1:3–4 – Luke’s careful historical investigation: “It seemed good to me also… having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you…”
In summary, Bart Ehrman’s “contradiction” dissolves under careful study. Luke, writing as a meticulous historian under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, did not confuse his timeline—he recorded the words of a real man, Gamaliel, who referred to an earlier Theudas, now lost to general history but well known to contemporaries in Jerusalem.