Rules behind resolving alleged Biblical discrepancies

One of the charges that is consistently leveled against Biblical reliability is that the Bible is "full of contradictions". This is certainly not a new charge, and the field of Apologetics, with its disciplined approach to defending God's word surely has a defined, commonly accepted approach to dealing with alleged discrepancies. What is that approach? In other words, what are the common "rules" (or less stringently, "guidelines") that are taught and followed in classic apologetics? --- **To be very clear**, I am not asking "is the Bible reliable?". I'm not asking "are the rules used true, correct, or sound"? I am well aware that skeptics, atheists, and Christians that believe the Bible could contain contradictions will likely disagree with the rules and techniques applied by apologetics. I'm not asking if the rules are true, I'm simply asking what they are, so that we have a record of the techniques used on the site. My hope is that these rules can be referenced later, for questions about such contradictions, to provide a framework for addressing the apparent contradiction questions using the classic apologetic approach.