Contradiction with Deuteronomy 12:15
This verse permits the slaughter of animals for food without requiring them to be brought to the tabernacle, which contradicts the restriction in Leviticus 17:5.
Deuteronomy 12:15: Notwithstanding thou mayest kill and eat flesh in all thy gates, whatsoever thy soul lusteth after, according to the blessing of the LORD thy God which he hath given thee: the unclean and the clean may eat thereof, as of the roebuck, and as of the hart.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 14:34
Here, the Israelites are instructed to slaughter and eat animals without the prerequisite of bringing them to a specific place, as outlined in Leviticus 17:5.
1 Samuel 14:34: And Saul said, Disperse yourselves among the people, and say unto them, Bring me hither every man his ox, and every man his sheep, and slay [them] here, and eat; and sin not against the LORD in eating with the blood. And all the people brought every man his ox with him that night, and slew [them] there. [with him: Heb. in his hand]
Contradiction with 1 Kings 8:62-63
Large numbers of animals are sacrificed at the temple, suggesting a deviation from the centralized sacrificial requirement found in Leviticus 17:5.
1 Kings 8:62-63: And the king, and all Israel with him, offered sacrifice before the LORD.
Contradiction with Ezekiel 34:3
The focus on consuming the meat of flocks implies regular and widespread killings that do not adhere to the ritualized process demanded in Leviticus 17:5.
Ezekiel 34:3: Ye eat the fat, and ye clothe you with the wool, ye kill them that are fed: [but] ye feed not the flock.
Paradox #1
Leviticus 17:5 discusses sacrifices and where they should be made. A potential contradiction could be related to the practice and location of sacrificial offerings. In earlier biblical texts or traditions, sacrifices might have been conducted at various local shrines or altars, suggesting a decentralized approach. However, Leviticus emphasizes that sacrifices should be brought to a central location, like the Tabernacle. This shift indicates a possible tension between older practices of multiple local worship sites and a later move towards centralized worship, which might reflect changes in religious practice or authority.