Contradiction with Acts 10:15
This verse states that what God has cleansed should not be called common, contradicting the dietary restrictions of Leviticus 11:26.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with Mark 7:18-19
Jesus declares that nothing entering a man from outside can defile him, suggesting a departure from Leviticus 11:26's food restrictions.
Mark 7:18-19: Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
Paul expresses that nothing is unclean in itself, opposing the dietary laws in Leviticus 11:26.
Romans 14:14: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean. [unclean: Gr. common]
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 4:4
This verse asserts that every creature of God is good and nothing is to be refused, challenging the unclean label in Leviticus 11:26.
1 Timothy 4:4: For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Contradiction with Colossians 2:16
Paul advises not to let anyone judge you in food, implying a contrast to the regulations of Leviticus 11:26.
Colossians 2:16: Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath [days]: [in meat...: or, for eating and drinking] [respect: or, part]
Paradox #1
Leviticus 11:26 involves dietary laws. A potential contradiction might arise in the New Testament, where dietary restrictions are relaxed or abolished, such as in Acts 10:9-16. This can be seen as inconsistent because the Old Testament gives detailed laws about what is unclean, while the New Testament suggests these laws are no longer applicable.
Paradox #2
The contradiction in Leviticus 11:26 could relate to how animals are classified. The verse implies a distinction between clean and unclean animals based on specific physical traits. Modern biology, however, uses a more complex system to classify animals based on genetic relationships and evolutionary history, which does not align with the simple criteria used in the verse.
Paradox #3
Some people see a moral conflict between dietary laws in Leviticus and the idea of universal love and acceptance. While these laws set specific rules, the broader message of love and inclusivity can feel inconsistent with strict guidelines that might exclude or judge others based on what they eat.