Contradiction with Ezekiel 18:20
Emphasizes individual responsibility for sin, contrasting Rahab's family's salvation due to her actions.
Ezekiel 18:20: The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
Contradiction with James 2:24
States that justification is by works, contradicting the notion of mere promise leading to salvation as seen in Rahab's agreement.
James 2:24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Contradiction with Matthew 7:21
Implies that not everyone who agrees with God's will shall enter the kingdom, whereas Rahab's simple agreement provided safety.
Matthew 7:21: Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
Contradiction with Hebrews 11:31
Emphasizes Rahab's faith for salvation, potentially contradicting her actions being primary as indicated by the agreement in Joshua 2:21.
Hebrews 11:31: By faith the harlot Rahab perished not with them that believed not, when she had received the spies with peace. [that...: or, that were disobedient]
Contradiction with Romans 3:28
Stresses that a man is justified by faith without deeds of the law, contradicting the deeds-based aspect of Rahab's protection.
Romans 3:28: Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.
Contradiction with Proverbs 16:6
Notes mercy and truth as elements that purify sin and maintain relationships contrary to the mere fulfillment of an oath.
Proverbs 16:6: By mercy and truth iniquity is purged: and by the fear of the LORD [men] depart from evil.
Paradox #1
The possible contradiction in Joshua 2:21 could involve the ethical dilemma of lying. In this context, Rahab's actions might be seen as conflicting with the moral principle of honesty, as she deceives others to protect the spies. This raises the question of whether lying can be justified if it serves a greater good, creating a tension between truthfulness and the desire to save lives.