Contradiction with Matthew 5:39
Instructs to turn the other cheek instead of seeking an eye for an eye, contradicting the call for retribution in Leviticus 24:17.
Matthew 5:39: But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:44
Commands to love your enemies, which contrasts with the retributive principle in Leviticus 24:17.
Matthew 5:44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Contradiction with Romans 12:19
Advises believers not to avenge themselves but leave vengeance to God, differing from the direct retribution stated in Leviticus 24:17.
Romans 12:19: Dearly beloved, avenge not yourselves, but [rather] give place unto wrath: for it is written, Vengeance [is] mine; I will repay, saith the Lord.
Contradiction with Proverbs 25:21-22
Encourages feeding your enemy if they are hungry, opposing the idea of retribution found in Leviticus 24:17.
Proverbs 25:21-22: If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink:
Paradox #1
Leviticus 24:17 talks about the "eye for an eye" principle, which can seem contradictory to the New Testament's teachings of forgiveness and turning the other cheek, as taught by Jesus in the Gospels. This difference can create tension or confusion about whether justice or mercy should be prioritized.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 24:17 states a principle about justice that might conflict with teachings about forgiveness and mercy found in other parts of the Bible, like in the New Testament where Jesus emphasizes forgiveness and turning the other cheek. This could create tension between the idea of strict justice versus mercy and forgiveness.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict could stem from the differing views on capital punishment found in various parts of religious texts and their interpretation over time. This verse might conflict with teachings in other parts of the Bible that emphasize forgiveness, mercy, or the sanctity of life. Religious and legal views on justice and retribution have evolved, possibly leading to inconsistencies with how this rule is applied or understood today.
Paradox #4
The contradiction or conflict could be that the verse implies a strict "eye for an eye" approach, which might seem harsh or unforgiving to some, especially when compared to other teachings in the Bible that emphasize forgiveness and mercy, such as those found in the New Testament. This could create tension between adhering to strict justice and showing compassion.