Contradiction with Matthew 5:17-18
Jesus states that He has not come to abolish the Law, implying its importance, while Acts 15:10 questions imposing the yoke of the Law.
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 Romans 3:31
Paul affirms the establishment of the Law through faith, whereas Acts 15:10 suggests relief from the Law's burden.
Romans 3:31: Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Contradiction with James 2:10
This verse emphasizes the obligation to keep the whole law, contrasting with Acts 15:10 which criticizes legalistic burdens.
James 2:10: For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:10
It declares a curse on those who rely on following the Law, aligning with the opposition to Acts 15:10's yoke but highlighting a negative view that Acts 15:10 addresses.
Galatians 3:10: For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Contradiction with Colossians 2:14
Talks about blotting out ordinances contrary to us, conflicting with the heavy yoke mentioned in Acts 15:10.
Colossians 2:14: Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 1:8
States the Law is good if used lawfully, which can contradict Acts 15:10's view of the Law as an unbearable yoke.
1 Timothy 1:8: But we know that the law [is] good, if a man use it lawfully;
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction in Acts 15:10 might arise from the debate about whether adhering to strict Jewish laws (such as circumcision) is necessary for salvation, especially for Gentile converts. Some may see a conflict between the requirement of following the law in the Old Testament and the message of salvation by faith through grace in the New Testament. This verse highlights the tension between these two perspectives, as it questions imposing old laws on new believers.
Paradox #2
Acts 15:10 discusses the issue of imposing certain religious laws on new believers. A potential contradiction or conflict from this could arise in interpreting the necessity and relevance of following old laws versus new faith practices. Some might see a conflict between adherence to traditional laws and the freedom offered through faith. This can lead to differences in how rules and traditions should be applied within the church.
Paradox #3
Acts 15:10 is about not imposing strict rules on believers that are too difficult to follow. A possible contradiction could be with earlier Jewish laws that were very detailed and demanding. This might seem inconsistent because it suggests a move away from traditional laws that were followed for a long time.
Paradox #4
Acts 15:10 raises a potential contradiction in the debate over whether new believers should follow all the old religious laws. The conflict arises from the idea that imposing these old rules might go against the message of freedom and grace that is central to the new faith. It's a clash between sticking to tradition and embracing a new way of believing.