Contradiction with Psalm 103:3
This verse speaks of God healing all diseases, which implies unconditional divine healing, unlike Exodus 15:26 which conditions healing on obedience to God.
Psalm 103:3: Who forgiveth all thine iniquities; who healeth all thy diseases;
Contradiction with Job 2:7
Here, God allows Satan to afflict Job with disease, which contradicts the notion in Exodus 15:26 that obedience leads to protection from diseases.
Job 2:7: So went Satan forth from the presence of the LORD, and smote Job with sore boils from the sole of his foot unto his crown.
Contradiction with Ecclesiastes 9:2
This verse suggests that the same fate, including sickness, befalls both the righteous and the wicked, in contrast to the conditional promise of health in Exodus 15:26.
Ecclesiastes 9:2: All [things come] alike to all: [there is] one event to the righteous, and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him that sacrificeth, and to him that sacrificeth not: as [is] the good, so [is] the sinner; [and] he that sweareth, as [he] that feareth an oath.
Contradiction with 2 Corinthians 12:7-9
Paul speaks of a "thorn in the flesh" given to him by God despite his righteousness, opposing Exodus 15:26’s implication that faithfulness ensures freedom from such afflictions.
2 Corinthians 12:7-9: And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the messenger of Satan to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.
Contradiction with John 9:2-3
Jesus explains that a man's blindness is not due to sin, challenging the direct correlation between obedience and health as suggested in Exodus 15:26.
John 9:2-3: And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?
Paradox #1
One possible contradiction with Exodus 15:26 is the tension between the idea of a loving, merciful God and the conditional nature of God's protection and healing mentioned in the verse. It raises questions about why a benevolent God would allow suffering or illness based on adherence to certain commands, which might seem inconsistent with the concept of unconditional love or grace.
Paradox #2
One possible contradiction, inconsistency, or conflict related to "Exodus 15:26" could be the promise of protection from diseases if the Israelites obey God's commands, which might seem inconsistent with historical events where obedient individuals or communities still suffered from diseases or ailments. This could raise questions about the application or interpretation of divine protection and human experience.
Paradox #3
The verse implies that health and illness are directly linked to obeying divine commands. Modern science understands health in terms of biological, environmental, and genetic factors, rather than solely moral or spiritual behavior. This could be seen as a conflict between religious and scientific explanations for wellness and disease.
Paradox #4
Exodus 15:26 suggests that if people follow God's commands and do what is right, they will not suffer the diseases that afflicted others. The contradiction could be the implication that illness is a consequence of personal wrongdoing or lack of faith, which might conflict with modern understandings of disease and health that do not attribute illness solely to moral failings.