Contradiction with Matthew 5:17
This verse emphasizes that Jesus did not come to abolish the law, but to fulfill it, which may seem to contradict the notion of a change in the law implied in Hebrews 7:12.
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
It suggests that faith does not nullify the law, but rather establishes it, which can be seen as contradictory to the idea of a change in the law suggested in Hebrews 7:12.
Romans 3:31: Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.
Contradiction with James 2:10
This verse emphasizes the importance of keeping the entire law, which may appear to contrast with the concept of changing the law described in Hebrews 7:12.
James 2:10: For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one [point], he is guilty of all.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:18
It underscores that not even the smallest part of the law will disappear until everything is accomplished, which may contradict the implication of a change in the law noted in Hebrews 7:12.
Matthew 5:18: For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:21
This passage points out that the law is not against the promises of God, implying continuity rather than change, which might be perceived as conflicting with Hebrews 7:12.
Galatians 3:21: [Is] the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
Paradox #1
Hebrews 7:12 talks about a change in law due to a change in priesthood. This could be seen as a contradiction because the Old Testament often describes God's laws as eternal and unchanging, while this verse suggests that the law can change. This might raise questions about the consistency of God's nature and the permanence of His laws.
Paradox #2
Hebrews 7:12 might seem to create a contradiction or inconsistency because it suggests a change in the law, which could be puzzling since the law was traditionally viewed as unchangeable. This change implies a new priesthood and a shift from the old way to a new one under Jesus, possibly causing confusion about the permanence of earlier laws.
Paradox #3
Hebrews 7:12 suggests a change in the law. The potential contradiction or inconsistency here is with earlier parts of the Bible that emphasize the permanence and unchanging nature of God's law, such as in the Old Testament. This could cause a conflict with the idea that God's laws are eternal and immutable.
Paradox #4
The contradiction or conflict in Hebrews 7:12 could be seen in the need to change religious laws when a new priesthood is introduced. This suggests that laws considered divinely given can be altered, raising questions about the permanence and unchangeability of divine commandments. Some might see this as conflicting with the belief that divine laws are perfect and eternal.