Contradiction with Colossians 2:16
This verse contradicts Leviticus 16:29 by suggesting that believers should not be judged based on observing certain holy days or practices, implying freedom from strict observance of Old Testament rituals.
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]
Contradiction with Romans 14:5
This verse contradicts Leviticus 16:29 as it indicates that considering one day holier than another is a matter of personal conviction, rather than a mandated observance.
Romans 14:5: One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day [alike]. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind. [fully persuaded: or, fully assured]
Contradiction with Galatians 4:9-10
These verses contradict Leviticus 16:29 by expressing concern over returning to observing certain days and seasons, suggesting a shift away from legalistic observance.
Galatians 4:9-10: But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? [turn ye again: or, turn ye back] [elements: or, rudiments]
Contradiction with Hebrews 10:1
This verse implies that the ceremonial laws are a shadow of things to come, contrasting with the prescriptive observance of days outlined in Leviticus 16:29.
Hebrews 10:1: For the law having a shadow of good things to come, [and] not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
Contradiction with Mark 2:27
This verse contradicts Leviticus 16:29 by highlighting that the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath, suggesting a broader interpretation of holy observance.
Mark 2:27: And he said unto them, The sabbath was made for man, and not man for the sabbath:
Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse suggests that external observances do not defile a person, contrasting with the emphasis on specific ceremonial observances in Leviticus 16:29.
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.
Paradox #1
Leviticus 16:29 talks about a specific day of rest and fasting. A potential moral conflict could be that the strict observance doesn't take into account individual circumstances or personal hardships, such as someone who might suffer physically or mentally from fasting. This could conflict with the idea of compassion or understanding for personal needs.