Contradiction with Isaiah 55:8-9
These verses emphasize that God's thoughts and ways are higher than human understanding, contrasting with the questioning of God's actions in Judges 21:3.
Isaiah 55:8-9: For my thoughts [are] not your thoughts, neither [are] your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
Contradiction with Jeremiah 29:11
This verse speaks of God's plans for prosperity and hope, contradicting the perception of misfortune and divine absence in Judges 21:3.
Jeremiah 29:11: For I know the thoughts that I think toward you, saith the LORD, thoughts of peace, and not of evil, to give you an expected end. [expected...: Heb. end and expectation]
Contradiction with Romans 8:28
This verse suggests that all things work together for good for those who love God, conflicting with the sense of despair and questioning of God's intentions in Judges 21:3.
Romans 8:28: And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to [his] purpose.
Contradiction with James 1:13
It states that God does not tempt anyone with evil, which contrasts with the implication of divine causation of suffering in Judges 21:3.
James 1:13: Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man: [evil: or, evils]
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 14:33
This verse states that God is not the author of confusion, contradicting the sense of chaos and misunderstanding of God's purposes in Judges 21:3.
1 Corinthians 14:33: For God is not [the author] of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints. [confusion: Gr. tumult, or, unquietness]
Paradox #1
The potential theological conflict in Judges 21:3 arises from questioning God's role in the suffering and loss experienced by the tribe of Benjamin. It might seem inconsistent with the idea of a loving and merciful God to allow such devastation among His own people. This can challenge the belief in God's justice and benevolence.
Paradox #2
The contradiction in Judges 21:3 could be seen in how the Israelites question why a tribe of Israel is missing, even though they had participated in actions that led to the tribe's endangerment. This reflects a conflict between their sense of community and the consequences of their own decisions, highlighting a tension between responsibility and compassion.