Versión en Español


Alleged Discrepancies

Article Reprints

Audio Resources

Bible Bullets

Darwin Day Debate

Decisive Designs


“In the News”

Reason & Revelation

Research Articles

Scripturally Speaking

Sensible Science


Discovery for Kids

Examine the Evidence

Home Study Courses



A.P. Information

About AP

Contact AP

Copyright Statement

Help AP

Privacy Statement

Speaking Schedules

A.P. Scientists and
Auxiliary Writers

Usage Guidelines

Apologetics Press :: Alleged Discrepancies

Six or Eight Days?
by Eric Lyons, M.Min.
Printer version | Email this article

After Jesus prophesied during His earthly ministry that some would live to see the establishment of God’s kingdom, the first two books of the New Testament indicate six days expired before Peter, James, and John were led up on a high mountain to witness the transfiguration of Jesus (Matthew 16:28-17:2; Mark 9:1-2). Luke’s account, on the other hand, says that Jesus’ transfiguration occurred “about eight days after” Jesus prophesied of the approaching kingdom’s establishment (9:27-29). Skeptics charge that this difference in the time elapsed between the two events constitutes an obvious error. They profess that such textual differences should lead the honest person to admit that the Bible contains contradictions, and thus is not the inerrant Word of God.

Admittedly, at first glance it may seem to the casual reader that Luke’s time line contradicts Matthew and Mark’s account of the time that elapsed between Jesus’ prophecy and His transfiguration. However, a closer examination reveals that Luke never intended for his readers to understand that exactly 192 hours (i.e., eight 24-hour days) elapsed from the moment Jesus finished His prophecy to the time He and the others began their ascent to the “ mount of transfiguration.” Luke recorded that it was “about eight days,” not that it was eight days exactly. Although Luke was a physician (cf. Colossians 4:14), he did not use  “scientific precision” in this case. Rather, he merely approximated the time separating the two events.

Furthermore, it seems clear that whereas Matthew and Mark excluded the days of the two terminal events (the prophecy and the transfiguration), Luke included both days, as well as the six intermediate days, and thus mentioned that the two events were eight days apart. Even today when people rehearse something they witnessed a few days earlier, they may refer to the events as happening on “different” days. For example, if a store was robbed on a Monday afternoon, and the following Monday morning a witness told friends what he had seen, one could say truthfully that he recalled the events six days or eight days after they occurred. If one were counting only full days, then six would be correct (Tuesday through Sunday). But it also would be correct to speak of the events as occurring eight days earlier—if one were including both full and partial days (Monday through Monday). Whether one uses “six” or “ eight” does not discredit the account of what actually happened. Likewise, the time difference between Matthew, Mark, and Luke in no way represents a legitimate contradiction. Luke simply used the inclusive method of reckoning time (counting the portion of a day at either end of the period), whereas Matthew and Mark counted only complete days (Coffman, 1971, p. 261).


Coffman, James Burton (1971), Commentary on the Gospel of Matthew (Abilene, TX: ACU Press).

Copyright © 2004 Apologetics Press, Inc. All rights reserved.

We are happy to grant permission for items in the "Alleged Discrepancies" section to be reproduced in their entirety, as long as the following stipulations are observed: (1) Apologetics Press must be designated as the original publisher; (2) the specific Apologetics Press Web site URL must be noted; (3) the author’s name must remain attached to the materials; (4) any references, footnotes, or endnotes that accompany the article must be included with any written reproduction of the article; (5) alterations of any kind are strictly forbidden (e.g., photographs, charts, graphics, quotations, etc. must be reproduced exactly as they appear in the original); (6) serialization of written material (e.g., running an article in several parts) is permitted, as long as the whole of the material is made available, without editing, in a reasonable length of time; (7) articles, in whole or in part, may not be offered for sale or included in items offered for sale; and (8) articles may be reproduced in electronic form for posting on Web sites pending they are not edited or altered from their original content and that credit is given to Apologetics Press, including the web location from which the articles were taken.

For catalog, samples, or further information, contact:

Apologetics Press
230 Landmark Drive
Montgomery, Alabama 36117
Phone (334) 272-8558

Web site engine code is Copyright © 2003 by PHP-Nuke. All Rights Reserved. PHP-Nuke is Free Software released under the GNU/GPL license.
Page Generation: 0.092 Seconds