Contradiction with Isaiah 1:11
This verse questions the need for sacrifices, which contradicts Leviticus 16:8’s focus on sacrificial rituals.
Isaiah 1:11: To what purpose [is] the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats. [he goats: Heb. great he goats]
Contradiction with Hosea 6:6
This verse emphasizes the desire for mercy rather than sacrifice, challenging the sacrificial concept in Leviticus 16:8.
Hosea 6:6: For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Contradiction with Psalm 40:6
This verse suggests God does not desire sacrifice and offering, which contradicts the instruction for sacrifice in Leviticus 16:8.
Psalm 40:6: Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. [opened: Heb. digged]
Contradiction with Jeremiah 7:22-23
These verses imply that God did not command sacrifices at the time of the Exodus, contradicting the sacrificial detail in Leviticus 16:8.
Jeremiah 7:22-23: For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: [concerning: Heb. concerning the matter of]
Contradiction with Proverbs 21:3
It suggests that doing justice and judgment is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice, which contrasts with the sacrificial system in Leviticus 16:8.
Proverbs 21:3: To do justice and judgment [is] more acceptable to the LORD than sacrifice.
Paradox #1
Some people might see a contradiction in how different translations interpret the roles of the two goats in this verse. Some translations suggest one goat is for God, while the other is for 'Azazel,' which has been interpreted in various ways. This could cause confusion about the purpose or nature of the second goat, leading to varying theological interpretations.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 16:8 might be seen to conflict with the idea of a consistent, single path for forgiveness of sins since it introduces casting lots between two goats, one for the Lord and one as a scapegoat, which is a unique ritual that doesn't align with later teachings about sin and redemption in other parts of the Bible.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or inconsistency in the context of the Bible verse "Leviticus 16:8" relates to the use and meaning of the term "Azazel." There have been debates among scholars and religious traditions about what "Azazel" actually refers to in the text. Some interpret it as a name for a demon or spirit, while others see it as a symbolic representation or even a geographical location. This lack of clarity and agreement creates a point of contradiction or inconsistency in understanding the verse.
Paradox #4
Leviticus 16:8 may raise questions about fairness or justice, as it involves a practice of assigning fate by casting lots, which relies on chance rather than moral judgment or individual merit. This could be seen as inconsistent with the idea of making decisions based on ethical reasoning.