Contradiction with Matthew 5:17
Hebrews 13:10 suggests the irrelevance of the old sacrificial system, while Matthew 5:17 declares that Jesus came to fulfill the law, not to abolish it.
Matthew 5:17: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Contradiction with Romans 3:31
Hebrews 13:10 implies a shift away from old practices, while Romans 3:31 emphasizes upholding the law through faith.
Romans 3:31: Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Contradiction with Galatians 5:14
Hebrews 13:10 focuses on leaving the old altar, whereas Galatians 5:14 states that the entire law is fulfilled in one command: "Love your neighbor as yourself."
Galatians 5:14: For all the law is fulfilled in one word, [even] in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Paradox #1
Hebrews 13:10 mentions an altar that those who serve the tabernacle have no right to eat from. A possible contradiction could arise regarding the idea of sacrifice and priesthood. In the Old Testament, priests have rights to eat portions of the sacrifices, but this verse suggests a new kind of altar related to Jesus that they can't partake in. The potential conflict lies in transitioning from Old Testament practices to New Testament beliefs, particularly regarding who has access to spiritual benefits in Christianity versus Judaism.
Paradox #2
The verse in question suggests a divergence between traditional Jewish practices and Christian beliefs. It emphasizes that Christians have a different form of spiritual nourishment compared to what is available under the old Jewish sacrificial system. This could create a contradiction or inconsistency because it highlights the departure of early Christianity from Jewish traditions, which might have caused conflicts between Jewish and Christian communities during that time. This can be seen as a representation of the tension as Christianity evolved as a distinct faith.