Contradiction with Proverbs 13:4
Contradicts 2 Samuel 19:26 by suggesting that the sluggard's desires lead to nothing, whereas Mephibosheth's inability to act is portrayed sympathetically.
Proverbs 13:4: The soul of the sluggard desireth, and [hath] nothing: but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat.
Contradiction with Matthew 25:26
Contradicts 2 Samuel 19:26 by labeling inactivity as wicked and slothful, while Mephibosheth's inaction is explained by his disability.
Matthew 25:26: His lord answered and said unto him, [Thou] wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed:
Contradiction with James 2:17
Contradicts 2 Samuel 19:26 by emphasizing the necessity of action to prove faith, whereas Mephibosheth's faithfulness is not tied to action due to his circumstances.
James 2:17: Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. [alone: Gr. by itself]
Paradox #1
The contradiction or inconsistency related to the verse involves differing accounts of Mephibosheth's loyalty. Earlier, in 2 Samuel 16:1-4, Ziba, Mephibosheth's servant, tells David that Mephibosheth has betrayed him by staying in Jerusalem, hoping to reclaim the kingdom. However, in 2 Samuel 19:26, Mephibosheth claims that Ziba deceived him, and he never intended to betray David. These conflicting accounts create an inconsistency about Mephibosheth's true intentions and actions during David's flight from Absalom.
Paradox #2
In 2 Samuel 19:26, the potential contradiction could be seen in the situation of loyalty and betrayal. The person in the verse claims an inability to accompany the king due to a situation beyond their control, presenting a scenario where loyalty is questioned. This sets up an inconsistency between their intended loyalty and the perception of disloyalty, leading to a conflict of trust and misunderstanding.