Contradiction with Numbers 20:10-11
Unlike in Exodus 17:6, where Moses is commanded to strike the rock, in Numbers 20:10-11, Moses strikes the rock instead of speaking to it as originally instructed, which displeases God.
Numbers 20:10-11: And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said unto them, Hear now, ye rebels; must we fetch you water out of this rock?
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 8:15
This verse highlights God providing water from a rock to sustain the Israelites, focusing on God’s miraculous provision rather than specifying the method, unlike the specific command in Exodus 17:6 to strike the rock.
Deuteronomy 8:15: Who led thee through that great and terrible wilderness, [wherein were] fiery serpents, and scorpions, and drought, where [there was] no water; who brought thee forth water out of the rock of flint;
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 10:4
This verse interprets the rock in the wilderness as Christ, viewing the event as spiritual sustenance, which contradicts the literal action and result described in Exodus 17:6.
1 Corinthians 10:4: And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ. [followed...: or, went with them]
Paradox #1
Exodus 17:6 describes a miraculous event where water is provided from a rock. A potential theological inconsistency might be how God's provision is depicted here compared to other instances where faith or human action is emphasized for receiving blessings. Some might see a conflict in the idea that God's interventions can seem inconsistent, either being directly miraculous or requiring human cooperation and faith. However, interpretations vary, and many find ways to harmonize these narratives within the broader theological framework.
Paradox #2
The contradiction with the event described in the verse is the idea of water coming from a rock when struck. Scientifically, rocks do not naturally contain large volumes of water that can flow out upon impact. This event is viewed as a miraculous occurrence and doesn't align with geological and physical principles.
Paradox #3
Exodus 17:6 might be seen as inconsistent because it shows divine intervention providing a miracle to meet physical needs, yet similar interventions don't always happen in other situations of human suffering. This could lead to questions about why help is given in some cases but not others.