Let’s take a look at one of those “contradiction” controversies. In the book of Acts, Luke records Paul’s testimony about his conversion to following Jesus three different times. The first time is the event itself, and the second and third are retellings by Paul before the authorities. There is a discrepancy between them. Let’s look at variations between English translations (NLT and KJV).

Original Event:
Acts 9:3 (NLT) As he was approaching Damascus on this mission, a light from heaven suddenly shone down around him. 4 He fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to him, “Saul! Saul! Why are you persecuting me?” 5 “Who are you, lord?” Saul asked. And the voice replied, “I am Jesus, the one you are persecuting! 6 Now get up and go into the city, and you will be told what you must do.” 7 The men with Saul stood speechless, for they heard the sound of someone’s voice but saw no one!

Acts 9:3 (KJV) And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: 4 And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 5 And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. 6 And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. 7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.

Everything here is essentially the same, but the testimonies of Paul recounting this event in later parts of Acts are translated with a slight variation between versions.

Testimony 1:
Acts 22:6 (NLT) “As I was on the road, approaching Damascus about noon, a very bright light from heaven suddenly shone down around me. 7 I fell to the ground and heard a voice saying to me, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me?’ 8 “‘Who are you, lord?’ I asked. “And the voice replied, ‘I am Jesus the Nazarene, the one you are persecuting.’ 9 The people with me saw the light but didn’t understand the voice speaking to me.

Acts 22:6 (KJV) And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. 7 And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? 8 And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. 9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.

In Acts 9:7 and 22:9, the story conveys seemingly different accounts of how Paul’s companions responded when Jesus spoke to Paul from the blinding light on the way to Damascus. In Acts 9:7, it states that the men with Paul heard the sound of someone’s voice but saw no one. However, in Acts 22:9, it says that the men with Paul didn’t “hear” the voice speaking to him. Did they hear the voice or not? Could they physically not hear an audible voice, or did they not understand? Before we move on to the last testimony, let’s take a closer look at the NLT translation of Acts 22:9, where things are worded a little differently.

Acts 22:9 (NLT) The people with me saw the light but didn’t understand the voice speaking to me.

Notice here that the text indicates that they “didn’t understand it.” That sounds different from “not hearing”. Back in the 1600s, when the Elizabethan English of the King James Version (KJV) was spoken, there may not have been much of a difference, since “hearing” and “understanding” can be somewhat interchangeable. In modern American English vernacular, we often use an idiom that says, “it went in one ear and out of the other”, about when someone hears the information but doesn’t retain or understand it. I believe the difference in wording is simply the result of changes in language and culture over time, and Acts 22:9 essentially states that, although they may have physically heard the voice, as mentioned in Acts 9:7, they didn’t understand it. Acts 9:7 is the same in both KJV and NLT, so the difference here only appears in Acts 22:9. There is one last testimony to look at in Acts 26.

Testimony 2:
Acts 26:12 (KJV) Whereupon as I went to Damascus with authority and commission from the chief priests, 13 At midday, O king, I saw in the way a light from heaven, above the brightness of the sun, shining round about me and them which journeyed with me. 14 And when we were all fallen to the earth, I heard a voice speaking unto me, and saying in the Hebrew tongue, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks.

Acts 26:14 (NLT) We all fell down, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic,[or Hebrew] ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting me? It is useless for you to fight against my will.

The final testimony clears things up. It is clarified in Acts 26:14 that Jesus spoke to Paul in the Hebrew language. Paul’s companions may not have spoken that language; instead, they likely spoke Greek, which was more common among the general population at that time. This is why he mentioned what language the voice said. Hebrew was primarily spoken and understood by Bible scholars rather than the general public. Paul was a Bible scholar, a Pharisee who studied under Gamaliel (Acts 22:3), and was therefore well-versed in Hebrew, as well as a polyglot. This implies that his companions heard the voice but didn’t understand the language, yet Paul heard and understood.

There is a note in the NLT about whether the voice spoke Hebrew or Aramaic, as different English translations use different words for these languages. I will get to that in a moment, but first, let’s deal with another “contradiction” of how the people reacted when the light shined.

In Acts 9:4, it states, “he [Paul] fell to the ground.” Acts 22:7 says, “I[Paul] fell to the ground”. Acts 26:14 says, “We [Paul] and his companions fell to the ground”. Did just Paul fall, or did they all fall when the light suddenly shined on them? 

First, Acts 9 is written from a narrator’s perspective (Luke), as he recounts the story of a historical event. Acts 22 and 26 are transcriptions of Paul’s testimony before the authorities. This is why there is a shift from the third person to the first person. Now, if I were to say to one person that I had a blue ball in a box, and then say to another that I had two balls in a box. Then, when I opened the box, there was one red ball and one blue one. Did I lie? No, there were two balls in the box, and at least one was blue, so both things were true at the same time, even though they leave out specific details in each statement. Paul is included in the “we” of Acts 26:14, so they all fell. 

In Acts 26, he mentions the companions in verse 13, but in the other passages, he mentions the companions at the end of the event. So it’s natural for him to say we after mentioning the others. If only he fell, then he would have said “I” even after mentioning his companions. The “we” refers to Paul, and the “I” excludes the companions when explaining the event in the first two passages, as they had not been mentioned yet. It doesn’t make sense to say “we” before introducing the fact that there was more than one person. 

Additionally, Acts 26 provides us with additional information that we didn’t have before, giving us a fuller picture. In this passage, Paul is emphasizing that there was even a language difference between him and his companions. Paul’s audience in Acts 26 is a Gentile King (King Agrippa), but in Acts 22, he is addressing the Jewish people in Jerusalem in their own native language. Therefore, the audience differs in each event, which is why he includes different details in each testimony.

Lastly, must ask the question: why did they all fall? It was a reaction to the light suddenly shining, and it’s stated that they all saw the light in Acts 26:13. This implies that they all saw it and fell. Someone may point out that in Acts 9:7 the companions were “standing speechless” while in Acts 26:14 they “all fell”, is this a contradiction? We know that Paul’s blindness is consistent in all three testimonies of the event in Acts, and his companions led him on afterward because he was blind. Therefore, they had to have gotten up at some point to guide him to the city. Paul is the only one who needed help getting up and walking, as he was the only one blinded by the light. Furthermore, Paul is the only one who understood the voice and talked to the voice speaking, so it makes sense that Paul stayed on the ground in reverence while talking to Jesus. Meanwhile, the companions got up and stood there, covering their eyes, waiting for Paul to finish talking to the foreign voice in the light.

Did the voice speak Hebrew or Aramaic? Modern translations, such as the NLT, use Aramaic, but a footnote states “Hebrew,” a term also found in older translations like the KJV. According to the concordance of this passage, the Greek word used for Hebrew or Aramaic is Hebrais (Ἑβραΐς). That word is consistently translated as Hebrew in the KJV, but as Aramaic in some modern translations, such as the NLT. Why? It appears in the New Testament three times, referring to the Hebrew language, in Acts 21:40, 22:2, and 26:14. The concordance explains that this word is not the Hebrew of the Old Testament, but rather a Chaldee dialect used by laypeople in the region at the time. Aramaic is part of the Semitic language family, just like Hebrew, and they share the same alphabet; however, they have different spellings and pronunciations for common words. The newer English translations distinguish it from Old Testament Hebrew, whereas the KJV authors viewed it as relatively the same, since it shares the same alphabet and is spoken by the same people.

Old Testament Hebrew was not commonly spoken for a long time because the Israelites adopted the language of Aramaic from Persia after the Babylonian Exile (6th Century BC). The language itself was preserved in written form by scholars and scribes, but commoners did not speak it. Acts 26:14 distinguishes that the voice spoke a language that only Paul could understand. Whether or not that was scribal Hebrew or Aramaic is still debated, but an argument can be made that it was the scribal Hebrew that trained Sanhedrin members would have been familiar with. Paul, being a trained Pharisee, would have been familiar with Old Testament Hebrew. In the end, when gathering these scriptures together, it seems reasonably clear that whatever language Jesus was speaking to Paul was not understood by Paul’s companions, so they heard it with their ears, but they didn’t comprehend it. There’s no contradiction here.

Resources:
The Greek text for Acts 26:14
Hebrais (Ἑβραΐς)
Hebrew Displacement by Aramaic
Another article on the subject