Contradiction with Matthew 5:44
Joshua 10:24 shows an act of dominance over enemies, while Matthew 5:44 teaches to love your enemies and bless those who curse you.
Matthew 5:44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Contradiction with Romans 12:20
Joshua 10:24 involves subduing opponents physically, whereas Romans 12:20 advises feeding your enemy if he is hungry.
Romans 12:20: Therefore if thine enemy hunger, feed him; if he thirst, give him drink: for in so doing thou shalt heap coals of fire on his head.
Contradiction with Luke 6:27
Joshua 10:24 describes asserting power over opponents, contrary to Luke 6:27, which commands doing good to those who hate you.
Luke 6:27: But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Contradiction with Proverbs 25:21
Joshua 10:24 involves physical submission of enemies, while Proverbs 25:21 encourages providing sustenance to enemies.
Proverbs 25:21: If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
Contradiction with Exodus 23:4-5
Joshua 10:24 depicts military aggression, whereas Exodus 23:4-5 instructs returning a lost animal to an enemy, implying practicing benevolence.
Exodus 23:4-5: If thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou shalt surely bring it back to him again.
Contradiction with Romans 12:19
Joshua 10:24 demonstrates a direct action against foes, whereas Romans 12:19 ideally suggests leaving vengeance to God.
Romans 12:19: Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction or conflict could relate to the Bible's teachings on peace, forgiveness, and loving one's enemies. The verse depicts a practice of warfare and dominance that might seem at odds with New Testament teachings where love and forgiveness are emphasized. However, interpretations often consider the historical and cultural context of the times to reconcile these differences.
Paradox #2
Joshua 10:24 describes a situation where the leaders of Israel place their feet on the necks of defeated kings. While this act is symbolic of victory, some might see a conflict with modern ethical and humanitarian values, which emphasize the dignity and humane treatment of all individuals, even enemies. From a scientific perspective, there isn't a direct contradiction because scientific principles don’t typically apply to historical or symbolic actions described in religious texts. Overall, it's more of an ethical or moral inconsistency rather than a scientific one.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict in this context might be seen as the Bible promoting violence or dominance, as leaders were encouraged to step on others' necks as a sign of victory. This could contradict messages of peace and humility found elsewhere in religious teachings.