Contradiction with Genesis 9:4
It contradicts by emphasizing that consuming blood is forbidden, resonating with the prohibition in Deuteronomy 12:16 but from a broader covenant perspective.
Genesis 9:4: But flesh with the life thereof, [which is] the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.
Contradiction with Leviticus 3:17
It underscores the perpetual statute against consuming blood, aligning with Deuteronomy 12:16 rather than directly contradicting it, indicating consistency in the prohibition across different contexts.
Leviticus 3:17: [It shall be] a perpetual statute for your generations throughout all your dwellings, that ye eat neither fat nor blood.
Contradiction with Leviticus 17:10-14
This passage expands on the ban against consuming blood, stressing its sacredness, thereby supporting the directive in Deuteronomy 12:16 instead of contradicting it.
Leviticus 17:10-14: And whatsoever man [there be] of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.
Contradiction with Acts 15:20
The New Testament directive for Gentiles to abstain from blood reinforces the prohibition in Deuteronomy 12:16, aligning the teachings across both testaments rather than contradicting them.
Acts 15:20: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and [from] fornication, and [from] things strangled, and [from] blood.
Contradiction with Acts 15:29
Reaffirms the abstention from blood, continuing the prohibition from Deuteronomy 12:16 into the early Christian church directive without contradiction.
Acts 15:29: That ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication: from which if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well. Fare ye well.
Paradox #1
The moral conflict in the verse could be the directive to avoid consuming blood, which may seem inconsistent with other religious practices or cultural norms that permit or do not address the consumption of blood. This prohibition might clash with modern dietary habits or medical practices, raising questions about its relevance today.