Contradiction with Psalm 91:10
This verse indicates that no evil will befall or harm the righteous, which contrasts with the depiction of feeding on blood in Job 39:30.
Psalm 91:10: There shall no evil befall thee, neither shall any plague come nigh thy dwelling.
Contradiction with Matthew 6:26
This verse describes God's provision and care for birds in a way that contrasts with the predatory image in Job 39:30.
Matthew 6:26: Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
Contradiction with Isaiah 11:6-9
These verses depict a peaceable kingdom where animals do not harm each other, contradicting the imagery of predation in Job 39:30.
Isaiah 11:6-9: The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together; and a little child shall lead them.
Contradiction with Genesis 1:29-30
These verses prescribe a plant-based diet for all creatures, which contradicts the predatory behavior described in Job 39:30.
Genesis 1:29-30: And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which [is] upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which [is] the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. [bearing...: Heb. seeding seed] [yielding...: Heb. seeding seed]
Contradiction with Romans 8:19-22
This passage suggests that creation, including animals, awaits liberation from corruption, which contrasts with the predatory nature in Job 39:30.
Romans 8:19-22: For the earnest expectation of the creature waiteth for the manifestation of the sons of God.
Paradox #1
The potential theological conflict with Job 39:30 might relate to the depiction of animals and their behaviors as designed by God. Some readers might struggle with reconciling these natural behaviors with the belief in a compassionate and loving Creator. The verse describes behaviors that can seem harsh or violent, which could be seen as inconsistent with certain views of how divine design should operate in a moral and benevolent manner.
Paradox #2
The potential contradiction in this context could relate to descriptions of animal behavior. If the verse describes a behavior or trait of a specific animal that contradicts scientific understanding or observation of that animal, this could be seen as a conflict. For example, if it describes a bird or animal doing something that scientific studies have shown it does not actually do, that would be a point of inconsistency.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in this verse could be seen as conflicting values between the natural order and human notions of compassion. It describes a predatory instinct in animals that might clash with human feelings about protecting the weak or innocent. This can create a tension between accepting nature's ways and adhering to human moral judgments.