Contradiction with Genesis 8:22
While Isaiah 34:4 suggests a dissolution of the heavens, Genesis 8:22 promises the continuity of natural orders, including seasons and day and night.
Genesis 8:22: While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease. [While...: Heb. As yet all the days of the earth]
Contradiction with Psalm 104:5
Isaiah 34:4 describes an unsteady universe, while Psalm 104:5 states that the earth is set on foundations and shall not be moved forever.
Psalm 104:5: [Who] laid the foundations of the earth, [that] it should not be removed for ever. [Who...: Heb. He hath founded the earth upon her bases]
Contradiction with Jeremiah 31:35-36
Whereas Isaiah 34:4 implies celestial bodies may fade away, this verse states the fixed order of the sun, moon, and stars.
Jeremiah 31:35-36: Thus saith the LORD, which giveth the sun for a light by day, [and] the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The LORD of hosts [is] his name:
Contradiction with Ecclesiastes 1:4
This verse indicates the earth abides forever, which contrasts with Isaiah 34:4's depiction of the heavens dissolving.
Ecclesiastes 1:4: [One] generation passeth away, and [another] generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.
Contradiction with Matthew 24:35
Isaiah 34:4 speaks of the heavens vanishing, but Matthew 24:35 implies a permanence to the heavens that will only dissolve with the passing of Christ’s words.
Matthew 24:35: Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away.
Paradox #1
One possible contradiction or conflict with Isaiah 34:4 might arise from the imagery of the heavens dissolving and the stars falling. This language can be seen as conflicting with passages that describe the stability and permanence of celestial bodies or God's creation, such as in Genesis where the created order is established as good and stable. Different biblical interpretations may try to reconcile this by viewing the language metaphorically rather than literally.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or inconsistency with Isaiah 34:4 could relate to the description of celestial events that do not align with scientific understanding or recorded astronomical observations. Such imagery might be symbolic, leading to debates on literal versus metaphorical interpretations. This can cause conflicts between scientific perspectives and literal readings of the text.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in Isaiah 34:4 could relate to how it describes the heavens and celestial bodies. The verse mentions the sky being rolled up like a scroll and stars falling. In simple terms, the sky cannot be rolled up like a scroll, and stars, which are massive celestial bodies, do not simply fall to Earth. Scientifically, stars are many light-years away from our planet and much larger than Earth, so the depiction doesn't align with our understanding of astronomy and the universe.
Paradox #4
Isaiah 34:4 describes a dramatic, cosmic event that could be interpreted as a conflict between the idea of an orderly, consistent universe and a sudden, chaotic transformation. This may seem inconsistent with the belief in a stable world governed by natural laws.
Paradox #5
Isaiah 34:4 might be seen as inconsistent when compared to scientific understanding of the universe. The verse uses imagery of the heavens being rolled up and celestial objects like stars falling. Scientifically, stars are massive, far-away objects, and they don't fall to Earth. This description might conflict with our current knowledge of astronomy and physics.