Contradiction with Genesis 3:3
Genesis 3:3 indicates that the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil should not be eaten nor touched, whereas Genesis 2:16 only addresses eating and gives freedom to eat from any tree except one.
Genesis 3:3: But of the fruit of the tree which [is] in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.
Contradiction with Genesis 2:17
Genesis 2:17 explicitly states that eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil will bring death, while Genesis 2:16 allows eating freely from all other trees, suggesting freedom rather than consequence.
Genesis 2:17: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die. [thou shalt surely...: Heb. dying thou shalt die]
Contradiction with Romans 5:12
Romans 5:12 explains that sin and death entered the world through one man's disobedience related to eating from the tree, contrasting with Genesis 2:16's portrayal of freedom to eat from trees (except one) without a mention of sin entering the world.
Romans 5:12: Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned: [for that: or, in whom]
Contradiction with James 1:14-15
James 1:14-15 describes how desire leads to sin and sin to death, presenting a process contrary to Genesis 2:16's immediate portrayal of free will and choice to eat.
James 1:14-15: But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
Contradiction with Matthew 4:4
Matthew 4:4 emphasizes living by every word that comes from God, not by bread alone, which contrasts with Genesis 2:16's focus on physical sustenance and eating freely from trees.
Matthew 4:4: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Paradox #1
Genesis 2:16 could be seen as conflicting with Genesis 3:1-5, where the serpent questions God's command and suggests that eating the fruit will not lead to death. This creates a tension between God's command and the serpent's suggestion, leading to questions about trust and obedience.
Paradox #2
The contradiction could be the difference between Genesis 2:16 and Genesis 2:17 compared to Genesis 3:4-5. In Genesis 2, God commands Adam not to eat from the tree of knowledge, warning that he will die if he does. Yet in Genesis 3, the serpent tells Eve they will not die but gain knowledge, which happens after they eat the fruit. This creates an inconsistency in the interpretation of what "death" means here.
Paradox #3
The moral conflict in Genesis 2:16 could be about the idea of giving free will versus imposing a restriction. On one hand, it suggests freedom to make choices; on the other, it introduces a rule or limit. This can seem contradictory because it implies both liberty and restriction simultaneously.