Contradiction with Genesis 9:3
This verse states that every moving thing that lives shall be food, implying provision and abundance, in contrast to the desperation in 2 Kings 6:28.
Genesis 9:3: Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.
Contradiction with Matthew 6:31-32
This verse assures that God provides for our needs, contradicting the dire situation and lack of provision described in 2 Kings 6:28.
Matthew 6:31-32: Therefore take no thought, saying, What shall we eat? or, What shall we drink? or, Wherewithal shall we be clothed?
Contradiction with Psalm 37:25
This verse claims that the righteous are never forsaken or begging for bread, opposing the desperation evident in 2 Kings 6:28.
Psalm 37:25: I have been young, and [now] am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread.
Contradiction with Philippians 4:19
This verse promises that God will meet all needs, clashing with the scarcity and distress in 2 Kings 6:28.
Philippians 4:19: But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
Paradox #1
The potential theological conflict with 2 Kings 6:28 is that it involves extreme and shocking actions that seem to contradict the value and sanctity of human life, which is central to many parts of biblical teaching. This verse, when read in isolation, might raise questions about God's justice and mercy amidst extreme human suffering, leading to challenges in understanding how such an event fits within the broader context of the Bible's message about God's character.
Paradox #2
2 Kings 6:28 might raise questions regarding ethical and moral dilemmas during extreme situations such as famine or siege. The verse describes a desperate situation leading to difficult decisions about survival, which could be seen as conflicting with other biblical teachings on the sanctity of life and moral behavior. However, it's important to consider the historical and contextual factors at play, and interpretations may vary.
Paradox #3
This verse involves a situation of desperation during a siege leading to cannibalism. The moral conflict here is between the extreme measure of survival and the inherent moral wrongness of consuming another human being. It highlights the contradiction between survival instincts and ethical values.