Contradiction with Deuteronomy 31:6
Emphasizes God's promise to never forsake Israel, while Lamentations 1:10 describes the enemy entering and defiling Jerusalem.
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 Isaiah 54:17
States that no weapon formed against Israel shall prosper, contrasting with Lamentations 1:10 where the adversaries are victorious.
Isaiah 54:17: No weapon that is formed against thee shall prosper; and every tongue [that] shall rise against thee in judgment thou shalt condemn. This [is] the heritage of the servants of the LORD, and their righteousness [is] of me, saith the LORD.
Contradiction with Ezekiel 39:25
God promises to restore Israel's fortunes, whereas Lamentations 1:10 highlights Israel's plunder by enemies.
Ezekiel 39:25: Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD; Now will I bring again the captivity of Jacob, and have mercy upon the whole house of Israel, and will be jealous for my holy name;
Contradiction with Zechariah 2:8
Describes Israel as the "apple of His eye," differing from Lamentations 1:10 where God seems to allow defilement.
Zechariah 2:8: For thus saith the LORD of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye.
Contradiction with Exodus 19:5
Declares Israel as a special treasure above all nations, unlike in Lamentations 1:10 where they are overrun by others.
Exodus 19:5: Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth [is] mine:
Paradox #1
Lamentations 1:10 might be seen as conflicting with the idea of God's protection and blessings on His people because it describes the enemies entering and defiling the sanctuary, which was considered a holy and protected place. This could raise questions about why God allowed this to happen despite His promises of protection.
Paradox #2
The moral conflict in that verse might arise from the idea of an intrusion or violation of something sacred or set apart, which could seem inconsistent if viewed in the light of divine protection or justice. It can be puzzling to understand why something holy would be allowed to be defiled or disrespected. This might raise questions about the fairness or fulfillment of promises in the context of divine oversight or intervention.