Contradiction with Hebrews 11:13-16
These verses describe the faithful as strangers and pilgrims on earth, implying they did not receive the promises yet sought a heavenly homeland, contrasting with the earthly land promise in Joshua 1:3.
Hebrews 11:13-16: These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of [them], and embraced [them], and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth. [in faith: Gr. according to faith]
Contradiction with Acts 7:5
This verse indicates that God did not give Abraham any inheritance in the promised land, contradicting the immediate possession implied by Joshua 1:3.
Acts 7:5: And he gave him none inheritance in it, no, not [so much as] to set his foot on: yet he promised that he would give it to him for a possession, and to his seed after him, when [as yet] he had no child.
Contradiction with Romans 4:13
This verse suggests that the promise to Abraham and his descendants was not through the law but through righteousness of faith, which may contrast with the conditional conquest and possession of land in Joshua 1:3.
Romans 4:13: For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
Contradiction with Luke 9:58
Here, Jesus speaks of having no place to lay His head, which could be seen as contradicting the assured possession of land in Joshua 1:3.
Luke 9:58: And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds of the air [have] nests; but the Son of man hath not where to lay [his] head.
Contradiction with John 18:36
Jesus states that His kingdom is not of this world, which can contrast with the worldly inheritance of land promised in Joshua 1:3.
John 18:36: Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
Paradox #1
Joshua 1:3 might suggest the moral issue of entitlement and conquest, where taking land is seen as justified by divine promise. This can conflict with modern views on the rights of indigenous peoples and the ethics of taking land from others.