Contradiction with Matthew 5:38-39
Exodus 21:29 prescribes a consequence for the owner of a dangerous ox, while Matthew 5:38-39 advocates for turning the other cheek instead of seeking retribution.
Matthew 5:38-39: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
Contradiction with Ezekiel 18:20
Exodus 21:29 holds an owner responsible for the actions of their ox, while Ezekiel 18:20 emphasizes individual responsibility for one's own sin.
Ezekiel 18:20: The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Contradiction with Colossians 3:13
Exodus 21:29 focuses on punishment and holding one accountable, whereas Colossians 3:13 emphasizes forgiveness over retribution.
Colossians 3:13: Forbearing one another, and forgiving one another, if any man have a quarrel against any: even as Christ forgave you, so also [do] ye. [quarrel: or, complaint]
Contradiction with Romans 12:17-19
Exodus 21:29 dictates a penalty for the loss of life, while Romans 12:17-19 advises against seeking personal vengeance and leaving room for God's wrath.
Romans 12:17-19: Recompense to no man evil for evil. Provide things honest in the sight of all men.
Contradiction with James 2:13
Exodus 21:29 could be seen as harsh by modern standards, whereas James 2:13 stresses mercy triumphing over judgment.
James 2:13: For he shall have judgment without mercy, that hath shewed no mercy; and mercy rejoiceth against judgment. [rejoiceth: or, glorieth]
Contradiction with Luke 6:36
Exodus 21:29 outlines a punishment, contrasting with Luke 6:36 which calls for mercy as God is merciful.
Luke 6:36: Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.
Contradiction with Proverbs 28:13
Exodus 21:29 provides for a penalty, while Proverbs 28:13 promotes confession and mercy over hiding wrongdoing.
Proverbs 28:13: He that covereth his sins shall not prosper: but whoso confesseth and forsaketh [them] shall have mercy.
Paradox #1
A potential theological conflict with Exodus 21:29 might arise from the differing views on justice and punishment found in later biblical teachings, especially when compared to New Testament ideas about forgiveness and mercy. While this verse emphasizes strict accountability and retribution, some might see a contrast with the messages of grace and redemption central to New Testament teachings. Such differences could be seen as inconsistency in how justice is applied throughout the Bible.
Paradox #2
Exodus 21:29 could seem inconsistent with the concept of personal responsibility and justice because it involves punishing the owner of an animal for the animal's repeated behavior, rather than the animal itself. This might conflict with the broader biblical themes where individuals are often held responsible for their own actions rather than those committed by others or inanimate objects.
Paradox #3
The potential contradiction or inconsistency with the content of this verse may arise in discussions about the fairness and morality of ancient laws compared to modern ethical standards. In ancient times, legal systems often reflected societal norms that might seem harsh by today's values. This difference can lead to debates about how justice and responsibility were understood historically versus now.
Paradox #4
Exodus 21:29 deals with responsibility and consequences related to an owner whose known dangerous animal causes harm. A contradiction or conflict might arise from the perceived severity of the punishment (death) for the owner, which some may see as too harsh or debatable in terms of individual versus shared responsibility for the animal's actions. There might also be an inconsistency when considering modern views on animal behavior and owner liability, which could differ from ancient practices and interpretations.