Contradiction with Galatians 2:20
States that Christ lives in me, suggesting a spiritual rather than a direct sustenance relationship, contrasting with John 6:57's analogy of living by the Father as sustenance.
Galatians 2:20: I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.
Contradiction with Matthew 4:4
Emphasizes living by every word of God instead of directly eating or being sustained by Jesus, which contrasts with John 6:57’s physical nourishment metaphor.
Matthew 4:4: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Contradiction with John 5:26
Indicates the Father has life in Himself and has granted the Son to have life in Himself, suggesting separate sustenance and source of life, unlike John 6:57 which emphasizes a direct relationship.
John 5:26: For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;
Paradox #1
Some people might find a contradiction in the idea that Jesus says He lives because of the Father, yet He is also seen as fully divine and equal to God in Christian theology. This could seem inconsistent because if Jesus is fully God, some might wonder why He would say He lives because of the Father, suggesting a dependency.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or inconsistency in the verse might arise from its metaphorical language, which can be interpreted differently. Some people might find it challenging to reconcile the idea of spiritual sustenance through belief with the notion of physical sustenance. Additionally, the idea of living by someone else could be seen as conflicting with the value of personal autonomy and responsibility. Overall, different interpretations may lead to perceived inconsistencies.