Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 1:27
This verse states that God has chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise, suggesting a value for what might be seen as "foolishness" in human estimation, whereas 1 Corinthians 14:19 emphasizes the use of understanding words in the church.
1 Corinthians 1:27: But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;
Contradiction with Psalm 19:14
This verse highlights the desire for words to be acceptable in God's sight, focusing on meditation and heart, which may contrast with the pragmatic emphasis on understanding in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
Psalm 19:14: Let the words of my mouth, and the meditation of my heart, be acceptable in thy sight, O LORD, my strength, and my redeemer. [strength: Heb. rock]
Contradiction with Matthew 11:25
Here, Jesus praises the Father for revealing truths to babes, not the wise, contrary to the focus on speaking with understanding in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
Matthew 11:25: At that time Jesus answered and said, I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.
Contradiction with Proverbs 17:28
Suggests that even a fool is considered wise if they hold their peace, indicating value in silence over speaking, which can contradict the allowance of speaking with understanding in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
Proverbs 17:28: Even a fool, when he holdeth his peace, is counted wise: [and] he that shutteth his lips [is esteemed] a man of understanding.
Contradiction with Ecclesiastes 5:2
Advises against being rash with words and suggests prioritizing listening over speaking, which may contrast with 1 Corinthians 14:19 focusing on speaking with understanding.
Ecclesiastes 5:2: Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter [any] thing before God: for God [is] in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few. [thing: or, word]
Contradiction with James 3:1
Warns against becoming many teachers due to stricter judgment, seemingly at odds with the encouragement of articulate speech in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
James 3:1: My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation. [condemnation: or, judgment]
Contradiction with Matthew 10:19
Jesus advises not to worry about what to speak, as it will be given by the Spirit, which may contradict the planning implied in knowing what one speaks, as mentioned in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
Matthew 10:19: But when they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 2:4
Paul mentions preaching not with persuasive words of human wisdom but with Spirit power, which could be seen as at odds with the emphasis on understanding words in 1 Corinthians 14:19.
1 Corinthians 2:4: And my speech and my preaching [was] not with enticing words of man's wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power: [enticing: or, persuasible]
Paradox #1
Some people might see a contradiction between 1 Corinthians 14:19 and earlier verses in the same chapter that talk about the benefits of speaking in tongues. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul discusses both the positive aspects of speaking in tongues and the greater value of speaking in a way that others can understand for teaching and helping them learn. The tension is between valuing spiritual gifts and ensuring that communication helps everyone understand and grow in faith.
Paradox #2
The verse might be seen as inconsistent with some earlier parts of the New Testament that emphasize speaking in tongues as a spiritual gift, like in Acts 2. There, speaking in tongues is depicted as a sign of divine presence, whereas in 1 Corinthians 14:19, there's an emphasis on speaking clearly so others can understand. This could be seen as a contradiction concerning the significance of speaking in tongues.
Paradox #3
The moral conflict in this verse could arise from the tension between the value of speaking in tongues as a spiritual practice and the importance of clear communication for teaching and understanding. It suggests prioritizing understandable speech over spiritual expressions that may not be comprehensible to others, potentially conflicting with the idea of valuing all spiritual gifts equally.