Contradiction with Mark 7:18-19
Leviticus 22:14 emphasizes not eating holy offerings unworthily, while Jesus in Mark declares all foods clean, suggesting a shift in the dietary laws.
Mark 7:18-19: Because it entereth not into his heart, but into the belly, and goeth out into the draught, purging all meats?
Contradiction with Romans 14:14
Leviticus 22:14 prohibits certain individuals from consuming holy food, but Romans states that nothing is unclean in itself, implying freedom from dietary restrictions.
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 Acts 10:15
Leviticus 22:14 restricts the consumption of consecrated items to certain people, whereas Peter is told in Acts that what God has cleansed must not be called impure, indicating a change in dietary perceptions.
Acts 10:15: And the voice [spake] unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, [that] call not thou common.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 10:25
Leviticus 22:14 deals with who can eat holy offerings, while Corinthians states believers can eat anything sold in the market, showing a broader approach to dietary rules.
1 Corinthians 10:25: Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, [that] eat, asking no question for conscience sake:
Contradiction with Colossians 2:16
Leviticus 22:14 suggests dietary restrictions to preserve holiness, but Colossians advises not to let anyone judge you by what you eat or drink, highlighting a contrasting view on diet's spiritual significance.
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]
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction in this context could arise from the strict rules about purity and restitution in the Bible, as they may seem harsh or disproportionate by modern ethical standards. It can be challenging for some to reconcile such rules with contemporary ideas of fairness and forgiveness.