Contradiction with Galatians 5:2
This verse contradicts Acts 16:3 by emphasizing that circumcision is not necessary for salvation and diminishes the value of Christ’s sacrifice.
Galatians 5:2: Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
Contradiction with Galatians 6:15
This verse contradicts Acts 16:3 by suggesting that neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, highlighting a new creation as the important factor.
Galatians 6:15: For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 7:18
This verse contradicts Acts 16:3 by advising against changing one's physical state regarding circumcision, countering the act of circumcision performed in Acts 16:3.
1 Corinthians 7:18: Is any man called being circumcised? let him not become uncircumcised. Is any called in uncircumcision? let him not be circumcised.
Contradiction with Galatians 2:3
This verse contradicts Acts 16:3 by illustrating that Titus, a Greek, was not compelled to be circumcised, opposing the decision made in Acts 16:3 for Timothy.
Galatians 2:3: But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
Paradox #1
"Acts 16:3" could be seen as a contradiction related to the issue of circumcision. In previous teachings, Paul argued that circumcision was not necessary for Gentile believers who accepted Christ. However, in this verse, Paul decides to circumcise Timothy due to community pressures. This action might seem inconsistent with his earlier stance on the matter.
Paradox #2
The contradiction in Acts 16:3 could be seen in Paul choosing to circumcise Timothy despite earlier arguing that circumcision was not necessary for salvation. This action might seem inconsistent because it appears to go against the earlier stance that physical rituals are not required for Gentile converts to Christianity.