Contradiction with Exodus 20:13
"Thou shalt not kill." This verse contradicts the suggestion to divide the living child, as it advocates against taking a life.
Exodus 20:13: Thou shalt not kill.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 32:39
"I kill, and I make alive;" This implies control over life and death belongs to God alone, contradicting the idea of dividing the living child.
Deuteronomy 32:39: See now that I, [even] I, [am] he, and [there is] no god with me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal: neither [is there any] that can deliver out of my hand.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:7
"Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy." Contradicts the lack of mercy in the proposal to harm the child.
Matthew 5:7: Blessed [are] the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy.
Contradiction with James 2:13
"For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment." Contradicts the notion of judgment without mercy suggested by dividing the child.
James 2:13: For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment. [rejoiceth: or, glorieth]
Contradiction with Proverbs 12:10
"A righteous man regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked are cruel." Suggests the wicked act is cruel, contradicting the proposal to harm the child.
Proverbs 12:10: A righteous [man] regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked [are] cruel. [tender...: or, bowels]
Paradox #1
1 Kings 3:25 might be seen as conflicting with a literal interpretation of the commandment "Thou shalt not kill" because the verse describes a proposal to harm an innocent child as part of a test. In this context, the apparent contradiction lies in using a violent threat to reveal the truth, which seems at odds with a command to preserve life.
Paradox #2
The story in 1 Kings 3:25 involves King Solomon suggesting to divide a baby in half to resolve a dispute between two women claiming to be the child's mother. The scientific inconsistency here is that physically dividing a living human would result in death, which is medically and ethically troubling. In reality, no rational justice system would consider harming a child to resolve parental rights. The suggestion itself is meant to reveal the true mother, but from a modern perspective, it is seen as an extreme and dangerous test rather than a viable solution.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in 1 Kings 3:25 could be seen in the suggestion to harm a child to establish truth, which might seem contrary to the value of protecting and caring for innocent life. The proposal could appear harsh or shocking, even though it ultimately exposes true maternal love and resolves the conflict wisely.