Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse suggests that what enters the mouth does not defile a person, contradicting the emphasis on physical contact causing uncleanness in Leviticus 15:10.
Matthew 15:11: Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man.
Contradiction with Mark 7:15
Similar to Matthew 15:11, this verse implies that external things, such as touching, do not defile a person.
Mark 7:15: If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Contradiction with Acts 10:15
This verse suggests that what God has made clean should not be considered impure, contrasting the rigid purity laws in Leviticus 15:10.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
Indicates that nothing is unclean in itself, opposing the specific uncleanness from touching in Leviticus 15:10.
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 Colossians 2:20-22
Encourages moving beyond human regulations about handling and touching, which contrasts the strict guidelines of purity in Leviticus 15:10.
Colossians 2:20-22: Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, [rudiments: or, elements]
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction or inconsistency with Leviticus 15:10 might arise from the Old Testament laws about cleanliness, which can seem to conflict with New Testament teachings about grace and the idea that faith in Jesus, rather than strict adherence to laws, is what purifies and saves people. Christians might find it inconsistent to follow ancient purity laws when New Testament passages emphasize freedom from the law through faith.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or inconsistency might arise from differing interpretations of cleanliness and purity laws among various religious groups over time. Some people may view these ancient laws as conflicting with modern perspectives on hygiene and religious practice, leading to debates on their relevance and application today.