Contradiction with Romans 9:8
This verse states that the children of the promise, not the children of the flesh, are counted as the seed, which can be read as affirming Galatians 4:23 rather than contradicting it, highlighting the role of divine promise over natural descent.
Romans 9:8: That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these [are] not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.
Contradiction with John 8:39
This verse mentions that if they were Abraham's children, they would do the works of Abraham, which emphasizes actions and lineage, potentially challenging the division made in Galatians 4:23 between born of flesh and promise.
John 8:39: They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham.
Contradiction with Hebrews 11:17-18
These verses underscores that Isaac was the child of promise, possibly reinforcing Galatians 4:23 by emphasizing the divine selection, rather than presenting a direct contradiction.
Hebrews 11:17-18: By faith Abraham, when he was tried, offered up Isaac: and he that had received the promises offered up his only begotten [son],
Contradiction with Genesis 21:10
Sarah demands that Hagar and her son be cast out, which supports the notion of Isaac as the child of promise implied in Galatians 4:23, rather than contradicting it.
Genesis 21:10: Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this bondwoman and her son: for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, [even] with Isaac.
Contradiction with Genesis 17:19
God specifically says that Sarah will bear Isaac, through whom God's covenant will continue, potentially affirming Galatians 4:23 rather than contradicting it.
Genesis 17:19: And God said, Sarah thy wife shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an everlasting covenant, [and] with his seed after him.
Paradox #1
The verse in question discusses differences between two sons, one born through natural means and the other through a promise. A possible theological inconsistency could be seen when comparing the idea of being born through a promise (interpreted as divine intervention or spiritual significance) versus natural means, which may raise questions about God's role in human affairs and salvation. This can lead to debates on predestination, human agency, and God's intentions in biblical narratives. However, many theologians interpret these differences as allegorical rather than literal, thus resolving potential conflicts.
Paradox #2
The moral conflict in Galatians 4:23 could arise from the idea of favoritism or inequality between individuals. It highlights a distinction based on birth circumstances, which might seem unfair or contradictory to modern values of equality and fairness. Therefore, the verse might raise questions about justice and equal treatment.