Contradiction with Psalm 51:16
Leviticus 1:14 prescribes burnt offerings, whereas Psalm 51:16 suggests that God does not delight in such sacrifices.
Psalm 51:16: For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give [it]: thou delightest not in burnt offering. [else...: or, that I should]
Contradiction with Hosea 6:6
Leviticus 1:14 emphasizes ritual sacrifices, but Hosea 6:6 highlights that God desires mercy, not sacrifice.
Hosea 6:6: For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Contradiction with Hebrews 10:4
Leviticus 1:14 involves animal sacrifices for atonement, while Hebrews 10:4 states that it is impossible for the blood of animals to take away sins.
Hebrews 10:4: For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:22
Leviticus 1:14 details the procedure for offerings to God, but 1 Samuel 15:22 suggests that obedience is better than sacrifice.
1 Samuel 15:22: And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams.
Contradiction with Isaiah 1:11
Leviticus 1:14 prescribes offerings of birds, yet Isaiah 1:11 expresses that God has no delight in burnt offerings.
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]
Paradox #1
The possible contradiction with Leviticus 1:14 could be related to its instructions for burnt offerings of birds. From a scientific perspective, the practice of animal sacrifice and burnt offerings as a method to appease or communicate with a deity is not supported by empirical evidence or scientific principles. The understanding of biology and animal behavior does not correlate with religious or spiritual outcomes as described in ancient texts. This represents a cultural or religious practice rather than a scientifically validated process.
Paradox #2
The contradiction or conflict could arise from the idea of animal sacrifice, which is described in the verse. Some people see a contradiction in the promotion of compassion and mercy elsewhere in religious teachings while still prescribing rituals that involve harming animals. This could be seen as inconsistent with values that emphasize kindness to all living beings.