Contradiction with Matthew 21:31
Jesus welcomes sinners into the kingdom of God, unlike Deuteronomy 23:17, which prohibits certain individuals from the community.
Matthew 21:31: Whether of them twain did the will of [his] father? They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.
Contradiction with Luke 7:37-39
Jesus allows a sinful woman to touch him, contradicting the exclusionary stance in Deuteronomy 23:17.
Luke 7:37-39: And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that [Jesus] sat at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,
Contradiction with John 8:7
Jesus says to let the one without sin cast the first stone, promoting forgiveness contrary to the exclusion in Deuteronomy 23:17.
John 8:7: So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
Contradiction with Acts 10:15
Peter’s vision declares all things clean, opposing the exclusive discrimination in Deuteronomy 23:17.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:28
Paul asserts equality in Christ, contrasting the exclusionary nature of Deuteronomy 23:17.
Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 6:11
Paul acknowledges that some believers were once sinful but are now sanctified, contrasting with the exclusion of certain people in Deuteronomy 23:17.
1 Corinthians 6:11: And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
Paradox #1
The verse could be seen as having a potential contradiction with the overarching biblical themes of love, acceptance, and forgiveness. While the verse sets specific rules and prohibitions for the Israelites, some people might find it inconsistent with the message of compassion and inclusion that is prominent in other parts of the Bible. Additionally, the verse's specific prohibitions may be challenging to reconcile with New Testament teachings that emphasize grace and redemption for all individuals.
Paradox #2
One possible doctrinal conflict with Deuteronomy 23:17 might be related to the concept of inclusivity and acceptance. This verse could be seen as conflicting with teachings in the New Testament, where there is an emphasis on love, acceptance, and not judging others, such as seen in passages like Galatians 3:28, which speaks about all being one in Christ regardless of background. The Old Testament verse might be perceived as excluding certain groups, while the New Testament encourages a more inclusive approach.
Paradox #3
One contradiction could be related to different interpretations of cultural and religious practices from ancient times compared to today. Practices that were common or accepted in ancient cultures might be viewed very differently now, leading to inconsistencies in understanding and applying such verses in modern contexts.
Paradox #4
This verse points out a rule against certain behaviors, yet elsewhere in the Bible, there is a strong emphasis on love, forgiveness, and acceptance. The moral conflict might be between strict adherence to rules and the later teachings of compassion and understanding for all individuals.