Contradiction with Matthew 5:17
Jesus states he came to fulfill the law, not to destroy it, which can be seen as contradicting the strict prohibitions about pagan practices in Leviticus.
Matthew 5:17: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Contradiction with Romans 10:4
Declares Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes, which might contrast with the adherence to ordinances stressed in Leviticus.
Romans 10:4: For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Contradiction with Acts 15:19-20
The apostles decide not to trouble Gentiles turning to God with too many prohibitions, focusing only on a few necessary things, thus seeming less strict than Leviticus 18:30.
Acts 15:19-20: Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God:
Contradiction with Galatians 5:18
States that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law, which can be at odds with the strict adherence required by Leviticus.
Galatians 5:18: But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Contradiction with Colossians 2:16-17
Suggests that believers should not be judged on religious observances, which might contrast with the emphasis on observing prohibitions in Leviticus.
Colossians 2:16-17: 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 Hebrews 8:13
Describes the old covenant as obsolete, potentially clashing with Leviticus’s call for strict observance of its laws.
Hebrews 8:13: In that he saith, A new [covenant], he hath made the first old. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old [is] ready to vanish away.
Paradox #1
Leviticus 18:30 warns against adopting certain practices that are considered detestable. A potential theological inconsistency could arise when comparing this warning with other parts of the Bible that emphasize forgiveness and acceptance for all, regardless of past actions. This could be seen as conflicting because it suggests strict avoidance rather than offering a pathway for redemption for those involved in such practices. Additionally, different interpretations of what practices are being referred to might lead to varying applications in contemporary contexts, creating inconsistencies in practice and belief among different religious groups.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 18:30 warns against adopting the customs and practices of other nations that are seen as sinful or detestable. A potential contradiction might arise in the context of ancient Israel's interactions with surrounding cultures. While the verse advises against foreign practices, historical records indicate that Israel did, at times, adopt customs and ideas from neighboring peoples. This could be seen as inconsistent with the strict warning in the text.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict in Leviticus 18:30 could arise from the tension between following specific religious rules and respecting diverse beliefs and practices outside of those rules. Some people might see it as a limitation on cultural or personal freedom, which could conflict with the idea of moral autonomy.