Contradiction with Isaiah 19:5
This verse describes the drying of waters as a judgment, not as a direct action from God, which contrasts with Ezekiel 30:12 where God declares He will dry up the river as an act of divine intervention.
Isaiah 19:5: And the waters shall fail from the sea, and the river shall be wasted and dried up.
Contradiction with Jeremiah 46:8
This verse depicts the rising of the Nile as overwhelming and full of strength, contradicting Ezekiel 30:12's depiction of the river being dried up by God.
Jeremiah 46:8: Egypt riseth up like a flood, and [his] waters are moved like the rivers; and he saith, I will go up, [and] will cover the earth; I will destroy the city and the inhabitants thereof.
Contradiction with Ezekiel 29:3
Here, the Pharaoh is portrayed as the great dragon in the Nile, which signifies strength and prosperity reliant on the river, contrasting with the prophecy of the river's destruction in Ezekiel 30:12.
Ezekiel 29:3: Speak, and say, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, I [am] against thee, Pharaoh king of Egypt, the great dragon that lieth in the midst of his rivers, which hath said, My river [is] mine own, and I have made [it] for myself.
Contradiction with Revelation 16:12
While this verse speaks of the Euphrates being dried up as part of God's judgment, it implies a future event rather than immediate action as suggested in Ezekiel 30:12 for the Nile.
Revelation 16:12: And the sixth angel poured out his vial upon the great river Euphrates; and the water thereof was dried up, that the way of the kings of the east might be prepared.
Paradox #1
This verse might mention drying up a river, which can conflict with scientific understanding if interpreted literally. In reality, drying up a major river like the Nile would require significant environmental changes or human intervention, which are not consistent with natural occurrences or historical record.