Contradiction with Mark 2:15-17
Jesus dines with tax collectors and sinners, showing inclusivity rather than exclusivity.
Mark 2:15-17: And it came to pass, that, as Jesus sat at meat in his house, many publicans and sinners sat also together with Jesus and his disciples: for there were many, and they followed him.
Contradiction with Acts 10:28
Peter learns that no person should be called common or unclean, opposing the idea of exclusion.
Acts 10:28: And he said unto them, Ye know how that it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company, or come unto one of another nation; but God hath shewed me that I should not call any man common or unclean.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:28
Emphasizes that all are one in Christ Jesus, removing distinctions that exclude.
Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
Paul states that nothing is unclean in itself, challenging ritual purity laws.
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]
Contradiction with Matthew 11:19
Jesus is criticized for being a friend of publicans and sinners, breaking traditional barriers.
Matthew 11:19: The Son of man came eating and drinking, and they say, Behold a man gluttonous, and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners. But wisdom is justified of her children.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 10:27
Advises believers to eat what is set before them when dining with unbelievers, promoting inclusion.
1 Corinthians 10:27: If any of them that believe not bid you [to a feast], and ye be disposed to go; whatsoever is set before you, eat, asking no question for conscience sake.
Contradiction with John 3:16
God's love is for the whole world, potentially contrasting with exclusivist practices.
John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Paradox #1
Leviticus 22:10 could be seen as potentially contradictory with the New Testament's message of inclusivity, such as in Galatians 3:28, which emphasizes that all are one in Christ. The verse in Leviticus restricts access to certain holy items to specific people, which may conflict with the New Testament's broader message of spiritual equality and access for all believers.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 22:10 deals with specific rules about who may eat offerings. Some might see a contradiction when comparing this to New Testament teachings which emphasize unity and breaking down barriers between people, especially in the context of sharing meals. However, this can be seen more as a shift in practice and understanding rather than a direct contradiction.
Paradox #3
Leviticus 22:10 refers to restrictions about who can eat holy offerings. A potential contradiction or inconsistency could be the differing practices and interpretations about who is considered eligible to partake in holy meals across various periods and Jewish communities. These variations might arise from changes in cultural, religious, or social contexts over time.
Paradox #4
The contradiction or conflict in this verse could be seen as an issue of exclusivity versus inclusivity. It establishes a rule that limits access to certain religious or sacred spaces or items, potentially creating a division between people who are deemed "insiders" and those considered "outsiders." This can seem at odds with more inclusive values that emphasize equality and universal access.