Contradiction with Deuteronomy 31:6
This verse assures that God will never leave nor forsake His followers, while Judges 16:20 depicts the Lord departing from Samson.
Deuteronomy 31:6: Be strong and of a good courage, fear not, nor be afraid of them: for the LORD thy God, he [it is] that doth go with thee; he will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.
Contradiction with Matthew 28:20
Jesus promises to be with His followers always, yet in Judges 16:20, the Lord departs from Samson.
Matthew 28:20: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.
Contradiction with Hebrews 13:5
It states God will never leave nor forsake believers, contradicting the departure of the Lord from Samson in Judges 16:20.
Hebrews 13:5: [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
Contradiction with Joshua 1:5
God assures Joshua that He will not fail nor forsake him, contrasting with the Lord leaving Samson in Judges 16:20.
Joshua 1:5: There shall not any man be able to stand before thee all the days of thy life: as I was with Moses, [so] I will be with thee: I will not fail thee, nor forsake thee.
Paradox #1
Judges 16:20 might raise questions about God's presence and power. Some people might wonder why God left Samson despite being a chosen leader. This could seem inconsistent with the idea of God always being with his people. However, this can also be seen as a consequence of Samson's own actions and choices.
Paradox #2
The possible contradiction or conflict in Judges 16:20 could relate to the idea of Samson losing his strength after his hair is cut. This raises questions about the nature of his strength and how it is connected to his hair, which might seem inconsistent with the belief that strength comes from God. It could prompt questions about whether physical attributes or divine empowerment is more crucial in this story. However, interpretations suggest that the hair is symbolic of his vow to God rather than the literal source of his strength.
Paradox #3
The scientific inconsistency with Judges 16:20 could be related to the idea of a person's strength being tied to their hair. Scientifically, human physical strength is determined by factors such as muscle mass, genetics, and physical conditioning, rather than the length of a person's hair. Hair does not have a natural connection to physical strength in biological terms.
Paradox #4
The contradiction in "Judges 16:20" could be the idea of someone being strong due to divine power but losing that strength because of a personal misstep. It might seem inconsistent that divine support is withdrawn based on human mistakes, despite being given unconditionally before. This raises questions about reliance on divine strength versus personal responsibility and consequences.