Contradiction with Proverbs 22:6
This verse advocates for training a child in the right way, suggesting guidance rather than taking a disobedient child to the elders.
Proverbs 22:6: Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it. [Train...: or, Catechise] [in...: Heb. in his way]
Contradiction with Ephesians 6:4
This verse advises fathers not to provoke children to wrath, but to bring them up in discipline, contrasting with the idea of bringing a child to authorities for discipline.
Ephesians 6:4: And, ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord.
Contradiction with Colossians 3:21
This verse instructs fathers not to provoke their children, which conflicts with the severe action of taking a child to the elders as outlined in Deuteronomy 21:19.
Colossians 3:21: Fathers, provoke not your children [to anger], lest they be discouraged.
Contradiction with Matthew 18:15
This verse suggests resolving issues personally and privately, unlike the public approach in Deuteronomy 21:19.
Matthew 18:15: Moreover if thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother.
Contradiction with Luke 15:20-24
This passage depicts a father forgiving and accepting his wayward son, contradicting the instruction to bring a disobedient son to the elders for judgment.
Luke 15:20-24: And he arose, and came to his father. But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction or conflict could arise because Deuteronomy 21:19 involves instructions for dealing with a rebellious son, which can be seen as harsh or inconsistent with New Testament teachings about forgiveness and mercy. This could create tension with the idea of unconditional love and forgiveness promoted in other parts of the Bible.
Paradox #2
This verse might be seen as contradictory or conflicting with modern views on parenting and justice. It involves taking a disobedient child to the city leaders for punishment, which clashes with contemporary ideas about family privacy and the role of the state in personal matters. Additionally, it raises ethical questions about collective judgment and punishment in historical contexts.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in that verse could be seen as the conflict between justice and family loyalty. On one hand, the verse suggests a course of action that prioritizes maintaining societal order and justice. On the other hand, it raises questions about the extent to which family members should protect or discipline each other, highlighting the tension between upholding communal laws versus family bonds.