Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse explains that what enters a man doesn't defile him, contradicting Leviticus 15:7's focus on ceremonial uncleanness from touch.
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
Here it is stated that nothing entering from outside can defile, countering the idea in Leviticus 15:7 about being made unclean by contact.
Mark 7:15: If any man have ears to hear, let him hear.
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
Declares that nothing is unclean of itself, contrasting with the ritual impurity described in Leviticus 15:7.
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 Acts 10:15
God tells Peter not to call anything impure that He has made clean, opposing the rules of impurity found in Leviticus 15:7.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 4:4
Everything created by God is good and nothing is to be rejected, which contrasts with the notion of impurity by contact in Leviticus 15:7.
1 Timothy 4:4: For every creature of God [is] good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving:
Paradox #1
The possible doctrinal conflict with Leviticus 15:7 could relate to the cleanliness laws versus the New Testament teachings. In the Old Testament, touching someone who is unclean makes you unclean too, but in the New Testament, Jesus emphasizes inner purity and faith over ceremonial laws, which might seem conflicting to some interpretations.
Paradox #2
One possible conflict with modern science could be the understanding of how diseases and infections are transmitted. The verse implies that touching someone who is unclean in a specific context leads to uncleanness, which might be seen as an early way to express concerns about hygiene or infection. However, it doesn't align with modern scientific knowledge of how pathogens are transferred, as it attributes uncleanness without distinguishing between different types of physical contact or understanding microbial agents.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in Leviticus 15:7 could involve the idea that touching someone who is unclean according to the verse's guidelines results in being considered unclean. This may conflict with principles of compassion and empathy, as it implies avoiding or distancing oneself from those in certain conditions, rather than offering help or support. This can seem inconsistent with the broader moral teaching of caring for others.