Contradiction with Luke 6:30
This verse encourages giving to everyone who asks, without focus on specific occasions like the release of Hebrew servants, potentially contradicting the special provision in Deuteronomy 15:14.
Luke 6:30: Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask [them] not again.
Contradiction with Proverbs 11:24
This verse suggests that scattering riches increases wealth, which might contradict the notion in Deuteronomy 15:14 of needing to give freely from your flock and resources during specific times, implying a loss.
Proverbs 11:24: There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and [there is] that withholdeth more than is meet, but [it tendeth] to poverty.
Contradiction with Proverbs 13:18
Speaks of poverty and shame coming to those who refuse instruction, opposing the generosity instructed in Deuteronomy 15:14 for released servants, suggesting that keeping wealth might be wise.
Proverbs 13:18: Poverty and shame [shall be to] him that refuseth instruction: but he that regardeth reproof shall be honoured.
Contradiction with 2 Corinthians 9:7
Emphasizes giving willingly and cheerfully, contrasting with the obligatory nature of the giving described in Deuteronomy 15:14.
2 Corinthians 9:7: Every man according as he purposeth in his heart, [so let him give]; not grudgingly, or of necessity: for God loveth a cheerful giver.
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 5:8
Stresses providing for one’s own household first, which can be seen as contradicting the outward generosity advised in Deuteronomy 15:14 toward servants.
1 Timothy 5:8: But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel. [house: or, kindred]
Paradox #1
Deuteronomy 15:14 encourages generosity towards people who are being released from servitude. A contradiction could arise when considering other biblical passages that regulate slavery or show acceptance of it. While this verse promotes kindness and generosity, it exists alongside other texts that might seem to accept unequal treatment of people, creating a potential inconsistency in moral messaging about human equality and freedom.