Contradiction with John 3:17
Emphasizes that God did not send Jesus to condemn the world, contradicting the accusation of deserving death in John 19:7.
John 3:17: For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
Contradiction with Romans 8:3
Highlights Jesus as a fulfillment of the law, contrary to John 19:7 where He is accused of breaking it.
Romans 8:3: For what the law could not do, in that it was weak through the flesh, God sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh, and for sin, condemned sin in the flesh: [for sin: or, by a sacrifice for sin]
Contradiction with John 10:30-33
Jesus states His unity with the Father, which is a point of contention leading to charges in John 19:7.
John 10:30-33: I and [my] Father are one.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:17
Jesus states He came to fulfill the law, not break it, which contradicts the interpretation of breaking the law in John 19:7.
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 Hebrews 4:15
Describes Jesus as without sin, contradicting the implication of guilt in John 19:7.
Hebrews 4:15: For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin.
Contradiction with Isaiah 53:9
Foretells the innocence of Jesus, which contradicts the charge of deserving death in John 19:7.
Isaiah 53:9: And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither [was any] deceit in his mouth. [death: Heb. deaths]
Paradox #1
The verse in question creates a potential contradiction when considered alongside verses that emphasize Jesus' sinlessness and innocence. The Jewish leaders accuse Jesus of claiming to be the Son of God, which they see as blasphemy deserving death under their law. This is in conflict with the Christian belief that Jesus is indeed the Son of God and sinless, hence should not be subject to punishment for blasphemy. It raises questions about justice and the understanding of Jesus' identity.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or inconsistency with John 19:7 is the claim by Jewish leaders that Jesus must die because he claimed to be the Son of God, which according to their law, was seen as blasphemy. This is inconsistent with Roman law, which governed the region at the time, and did not consider blasphemy a capital offense. The tension comes from explaining why Pilate, a Roman governor, would agree to execute Jesus for a charge that was not actionable under Roman legal standards.