Paul Carlson has some excellent information on Bible contradictions on the Internet. His site, New Testament Contradictions is very good.

He points out that Christians try to make out that the genealogies in Luke and Matthew which contradict one another are not for Joseph but only Matthew’s is and Luke’s is Mary’s even though Luke says it is Joseph’s.
He also observes that Romans 1:3 says Jesus is the sperma of David, the literal seed meaning Joseph or some other descendant of David had to be literal Jesus’ father. The Bible says that Jesus had to be descended from David and lawful king of Israel to be the Messiah and Son of God. This was so stressed in the New Testament that if Jesus wasn’t a true descendant and king he wasn’t the Son of God but just another fake. The New Testament traces Jesus' descent through Joseph who was supposedly only Jesus' foster father.
Christians say that though Joseph was not Jesus' father, Jesus became lawful king because Joseph was the unrecognised lawful king and Joseph’s heir and son by adoption. Christians still say Jesus was Joseph’s adopted son. But what rational God would promise King David a Messiah from his loins who was merely adopted into the line? And with Jesus, Joseph vanishes off the scene after the Nativity stories in the gospel. Joseph was never reported to have accepted Jesus as his legal son. Where are the legal papers? He was only called Jesus’ father according to the story but that doesn't mean he was a real foster father. It is no good. Jesus wasn’t even his legally adopted son! Some Messiah!
Carlson also observes that to say that Luke's Genealogy is about Mary is ridiculous for the Jews and all nations knew nothing about the egg cell. They thought that the sperm grew in the womb like a seed by itself. The woman was only the ground for the seed to grow in. So they counted descent through the father. Christians are guilty of the fanaticism of pulling in miracles to explain things. They are saying that Luke miraculously knew the facts of life though the egg cells were not discovered until 1827. This is sick and they would not tolerate it in any other cult but their own.

It was also a scandal that Matthew said that everybody believed the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem for Micah predicted that when he did not actually say the Messiah would be born there only that he would come from there.

Carlson sees that if John the Baptist had been the supreme prophet and testator to Jesus he would have joined Jesus’ intimate circle of twelve apostles. A divine plan that would exclude John would be a bizarre one indeed for John was so popular he could have got Jesus more acceptance. The Church says maybe John functioned better with his independence. So God did not give him the gift to give Jesus support that looked more like support! The Church says that John was to die before Jesus and so could not be made an apostle. But that was no excuse for God could have protected him and things would have been different if he had become an apostle. Judas died before he had a chance to be a real apostle, meaning one that was sent out to proclaim the gospel of the death and resurrection of Christ, and there is no talk about him. The apostles were not technically apostles or ones sent until the resurrection was witnessed. Jesus certainly promised the twelve that they would become apostles and he broke his promise when Judas failed. The Church says that he did not break his promise because he did all he could to make an apostle of Judas and Judas threw it back in his face. But Jesus could see the future so he should not have promised Judas a future he saw he would not have. When Jesus chose someone as abnormally corrupt and opposed to God as Judas he was as much to blame as Judas. So John should have been made one of the twelve. Nobody can dispute that John should have been one of Jesus’ many disciples. John obviously bore witness against Jesus or never mentioned him at all and that is why the story about the closeness between him and Jesus is a fabrication. It’s the gospellers trying to use John’s popularity to sweeten the people up to Jesus.

Carlson sees that the gospel claim that the 30 pieces of silver were weighed out for Judas is a lie for minted coins were in use then.

Carlson sees that John 18:24 says that Jesus was taken to Annas first after his arrest which contradicts the synoptics. The ridiculous Christian solution for that is that John means Annas was the first he knows of that Jesus was taken to. Then they say that the gospel was the last one and was written by an apostle? An apostle not knowing by the time he wrote the last gospel in the late first century? Come on!
It would be more sensible to hold that some philosophical book of wisdom is divinely inspired than the New Testament. When there are too many problems to solve it shows there is something wrong with any attempt to make the New Testament seem to be unity. The New Testament is an entirely man-made and wacky volume.
ALLEGED DISCREPANCIES OF THE BIBLE, John W Haley, Whitaker House, Pennsylvania, undated  
BIBLICAL EXEGESIS AND CHURCH DOCTRINE, Raymond E Brown, Paulist Press, New York, 1985
CHRIST AND PROTEST, Harry Tennant, Christadelphian Publishing Office, Birmingham, undated
CHRISTIANITY FOR THE TOUGH-MINDED, Editor John Warwick Montgomery, Bethany Fellowship, Minnesota, 1973
IN DEFENCE OF THE FAITH, Dave Hunt, Harvest House, Eugene, Oregon, 1996
JESUS AND EARLY CHRISTIANITY IN THE GOSPELS, Daniel J Grolin, George Ronald, Oxford, 2002
JESUS AND THE FOUR GOSPELS, John Drane, Lion Books, Herts, 1984
JESUS HYPOTHESES, V Messori, St Paul Publications, Slough, 1977
NEW AGE BIBLE VERSIONS, GA Riplinger, Bible & Literature Foundation, Tennessee, 1993
THE BIBLE, THE BIOGRAPHY, Karen Armstrong, Atlantic Books, London, 2007
THE BIBLE UNEARTHED, Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman, Touchstone Books, New York, 2002
THE CASE FOR CHRIST, Lee Strobel, HarperCollins and Zondervan, Michigan, 1998
THE HOLY BIBLE NEW AMERICAN VERSION, Confraternity of Christian Doctrine, Washington DC, 1970
THE JESUS EVENT, Martin R Tripole SJ, Alba House, New York, 1980
THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARY OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Kittel Gerhard and Friedrich Gerhard, Eerdman’s Publishing Co, Grand Rapids, MI, 1976
THE PASSOVER PLOT, Hugh Schonfield, Element Books, Dorset, 1996
THE UNAUTHORISED VERSION. Robin Lane Fox, Penguin, Middlesex, 1992

The “Historical” Jesus, Acharya S,
The “Finding of the Law”
New Testament Contradictions, Paul Carlson
Something’s Fishy: Deception, Secrecy and the Gospel
Biblical Discrepancies
The Case for Christianity Examined
Final Response by Steven Carr to Dr Wilkinson, Can We Believe in Miracles in a Scientific Universe?
This points out how the miracles of Simon Magus and Apollonius of Tyana which the Christians took for granted as authentic but ascribed them to demons and the pagan miracles for which reliable first hand testimony exists are rejected by Christians who believe in the gospel ones on less evidence.
Miracles and the Book of Mormon by Steven Carr. This argues that the Christians complain about Joseph Smith having copied and plagiarised miracle stories in the Bible to fill out the Book of Mormon while the gospellers did the same and stole Old Testament miracle stories and applied them to Jesus. For example the story of Jesus raising the daughter of Jairus is really just the story of Elisha raising a widow’s son to life from the Second Book of Kings. Even a lot of the wording is a perfect match with the Greek version of the Old Testament story. Carr notes how Christians reject many pagan miracle stories as frauds while accepting the miracles of Jesus on as little or even less evidence.
Biblical Errancy, January 1987, by Dennis McKinsey
The Problem of Competing Claims by Richard Carrier

No Copyright