Contradiction with Matthew 15:11
This verse emphasizes that it is not what enters the mouth that defiles a person, but what comes out of it, suggesting a focus away from physical actions as defiling.
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.
Contradiction with Colossians 2:16
This verse instructs not to let others judge you by food or drink, or with regards to a festival, or new moon, or Sabbaths, potentially challenging strict ceremonial practices.
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 10:4
This verse states that Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes, suggesting a shift from the Old Testament laws.
Romans 10:4: For Christ [is] the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth.
Contradiction with Hebrews 10:1
This verse discusses the law as a shadow of good things to come, indicating it is not the final word on moral and spiritual conduct.
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 Galatians 5:18
This verse indicates that if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under the law, implying freedom from certain stipulations of the Old Testament laws.
Galatians 5:18: But if ye be led of the Spirit, ye are not under the law.
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
This verse expresses a personal conviction that nothing is unclean of itself, highlighting personal discretion over traditional law.
Romans 14:14: I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that [there is] nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him [it is] unclean. [unclean: Gr. common]
Paradox #1
Leviticus 20:18 discusses a specific prohibition related to ritual cleanliness. A potential theological conflict might arise when comparing this Old Testament law to New Testament teachings, which emphasize grace and the teachings of Jesus over strict adherence to specific Old Testament laws. Some Christians believe that Jesus fulfilled Old Testament laws, including those about ritual cleanliness, making them less relevant for Christian practice today. This can lead to inconsistencies in how different groups interpret and apply these ancient laws in modern times.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 20:18, which concerns menstrual impurity, could be seen as inconsistent with modern views on gender equality and health. It reflects ancient rules for religious and cultural practices that may conflict with contemporary ethical and medical understanding of menstruation as a normal biological process.
Paradox #3
This verse could present a contradiction or inconsistency when considering modern perspectives on bodily autonomy and consensual relationships. It imposes specific rules surrounding natural bodily functions and private matters, which may conflict with contemporary views that emphasize personal freedom and consent in intimate relationships. This can be seen as a clash between adhering to ancient religious laws and respecting individual rights in today's society.