Contradiction with Hebrews 10:4
It explains that it is not possible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins, contradicting the concept of atonement by animal sacrifice as suggested in Leviticus 4:33.
Hebrews 10:4: For [it is] not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
Contradiction with Psalm 40:6
Emphasizes that God does not desire sacrifice or offering, whereas Leviticus 4:33 prescribes a sacrificial ritual for atonement.
Psalm 40:6: Sacrifice and offering thou didst not desire; mine ears hast thou opened: burnt offering and sin offering hast thou not required. [opened: Heb. digged]
Contradiction with Hosea 6:6
States that God desires mercy, not sacrifice, challenging the necessity of sacrificial offerings outlined in Leviticus 4:33.
Hosea 6:6: For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings.
Contradiction with Isaiah 1:11
God questions the need for the multitude of sacrifices, which contrasts with the prescribed sacrificial system in Leviticus 4:33.
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]
Contradiction with Jeremiah 7:22
Indicates that God did not command sacrifices when He brought the Israelites out of Egypt, which seems to contradict the sacrificial laws in place such as Leviticus 4:33.
Jeremiah 7:22: For I spake not unto your fathers, nor commanded them in the day that I brought them out of the land of Egypt, concerning burnt offerings or sacrifices: [concerning: Heb. concerning the matter of]
Contradiction with Matthew 9:13
Jesus references Hosea, stating the preference for mercy over sacrifice, which stands against the sacrificial rituals like those in Leviticus 4:33.
Matthew 9:13: But go ye and learn what [that] meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:22
Highlights that obedience is better than sacrifice, suggesting that following God's commands is more important than the sacrifices described in Leviticus 4:33.
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.
Paradox #1
Leviticus 4:33 deals with animal sacrifice as a means of atonement for sin. Theological conflict arises when this Old Testament practice is compared to New Testament teachings, which suggest that Jesus' sacrifice was the ultimate and final atonement for sin, making further animal sacrifices unnecessary. This could be seen as inconsistent with the idea of needing animal sacrifices for forgiveness.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 4:33 deals with the instructions for a sin offering, involving the sacrifice of an animal. A possible contradiction or inconsistency is that, although the text outlines detailed ritual practices, there is little archaeological evidence that these specific practices were consistently followed in ancient Israelite society. Additionally, the focus on animal sacrifices in the text contrasts with later prophetic writings that emphasize righteousness and justice over ritual offerings.
Paradox #3
Leviticus 4:33 involves animal sacrifice for atonement of sins. The moral conflict may arise from the idea of sacrificing an innocent animal for human wrongdoing, which clashes with modern views on animal rights and the sanctity of life. Additionally, the practice doesn't align with the belief in a more direct, personal responsibility for one's actions, rather than having a substitute suffer the consequences.