Contradiction with Ephesians 6:9
While Colossians 4:1 advises masters to treat their servants justly, Ephesians 6:9 emphasizes that masters should forgo threatening, highlighting a different aspect of conduct towards servants.
Ephesians 6:9: And, ye masters, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven; neither is there respect of persons with him. [forbearing: or, moderating] [your...: some read, both your and their Master]
Contradiction with 1 Peter 2:18
Colossians 4:1 focuses on fairness by masters, whereas 1 Peter 2:18 instructs servants to submit even to harsh masters, presenting an apparent inconsistency in expectations.
1 Peter 2:18: Servants, [be] subject to [your] masters with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward.
Contradiction with Titus 2:9
Here, servants are advised to be obedient and please their masters, which contrasts with the responsibility placed on masters to be fair in Colossians 4:1.
Titus 2:9: [Exhort] servants to be obedient unto their own masters, [and] to please [them] well in all [things]; not answering again; [answering...: or, gainsaying]
Contradiction with Exodus 21:20-21
In Exodus, there are conditions where masters are not punished for harsh treatment of servants, conflicting with the call for fairness in Colossians 4:1.
Exodus 21:20-21: And if a man smite his servant, or his maid, with a rod, and he die under his hand; he shall be surely punished. [punished: Heb. avenged]
Contradiction with Philemon 1:16
This verse speaks of a servant being more than a servant, as a beloved brother, which could contradict the hierarchical structure implicit in Colossians 4:1.
Philemon 1:16: Not now as a servant, but above a servant, a brother beloved, specially to me, but how much more unto thee, both in the flesh, and in the Lord?
Paradox #1
The contradiction or conflict in Colossians 4:1 could be seen in addressing fairness and justice from masters to their servants within the context of a system like slavery, which many today view as inherently unjust. The challenge lies in reconciling the idea of fairness with the existence of a practice that is fundamentally unequal.