Contradiction with Leviticus 11:7-8
These verses label swine as unclean and forbids eating their flesh, contradicting the removal of dietary restrictions in Acts 10:16.
Leviticus 11:7-8: And the swine, though he divide the hoof, and be clovenfooted, yet he cheweth not the cud; he [is] unclean to you.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:17-18
Jesus states that He did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, seeming to counter the nullification implied in Acts 10:16.
Matthew 5:17-18: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 14:3-21
These verses outline specific animals that are considered unclean and align with Jewish dietary laws, which are contradicted by Acts 10:16.
Deuteronomy 14:3-21: Thou shalt not eat any abominable thing.
Contradiction with Isaiah 66:17
This verse condemns eating swine's flesh and other unclean foods, which appears to conflict with the message of Acts 10:16.
Isaiah 66:17: They that sanctify themselves, and purify themselves in the gardens behind one [tree] in the midst, eating swine's flesh, and the abomination, and the mouse, shall be consumed together, saith the LORD. [behind...: or, one after another]
Contradiction with Malachi 3:6
"For I am the Lord, I change not;" suggests permanency in God's laws, which is seemingly contradicted by the change in dietary laws in Acts 10:16.
Malachi 3:6: For I [am] the LORD, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed.
Paradox #1
Acts 10:16 might seem to conflict with earlier dietary laws found in the Old Testament, particularly those in Leviticus. In the Old Testament, certain animals were considered unclean and not to be eaten. However, the verse in Acts suggests that these distinctions are no longer relevant. This could be seen as inconsistent with the Mosaic Law, leading to debate about the continuity and change of biblical laws.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or inconsistency in Acts 10:16 might relate to dietary laws. Before this passage, Jewish law had strict rules about which animals were clean or unclean to eat. This vision suggests that those laws are now changed. The conflict arises because it challenges the longstanding dietary rules given in the Old Testament, creating a tension between following traditional laws and new teachings.