Contradiction with Matthew 5:14
Hosea 4:5 speaks of stumbling, while Matthew 5:14 refers to believers as the light of the world, implying guidance and non-stumbling.
Matthew 5:14: Ye are the light of the world. A city that is set on an hill cannot be hid.
Contradiction with Psalm 37:23
Hosea 4:5 mentions priests and prophets falling, whereas Psalm 37:23 states that the steps of a good man are ordered by the Lord, suggesting stability.
Psalm 37:23: The steps of a [good] man are ordered by the LORD: and he delighteth in his way. [ordered: or, established]
Contradiction with Proverbs 3:6
Hosea 4:5 indicates leaders' failures, while Proverbs 3:6 promises that God will direct paths, indicating clarity rather than stumbling.
Proverbs 3:6: In all thy ways acknowledge him, and he shall direct thy paths.
Contradiction with Isaiah 40:31
While Hosea 4:5 conveys the idea of faltering, Isaiah 40:31 speaks of renewed strength and not fainting, offering a contrast in outcomes.
Isaiah 40:31: But they that wait upon the LORD shall renew [their] strength; they shall mount up with wings as eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; [and] they shall walk, and not faint. [renew: Heb. change]
Contradiction with Psalm 91:11-12
Hosea 4:5 implies stumbling, but Psalm 91:11-12 reassures that angels will prevent you from striking your foot against a stone, suggesting protection against falling.
Psalm 91:11-12: For he shall give his angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways.
Contradiction with Proverbs 4:12
Hosea 4:5 depicts falling, whereas Proverbs 4:12 assures that when you walk, your steps will not be hindered, and you will not stumble.
Proverbs 4:12: When thou goest, thy steps shall not be straitened; and when thou runnest, thou shalt not stumble.
Paradox #1
Hosea 4:5 might be seen as having a contradiction or inconsistency because it can imply that both leaders and ordinary people face consequences together. Some might find it unfair that individuals are held accountable for the failures of their leaders, especially if they did not have the power to change or influence their leaders' actions. This could raise questions about collective responsibility and individual accountability.