Contradiction with Matthew 7:7
This verse suggests that one must seek and ask to receive, whereas Luke 15:31 implies consistent access to all that the father has without needing to ask.
Matthew 7:7: Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you:
Contradiction with James 4:2
This verse implies that people do not have because they do not ask, which seems to contradict the notion in Luke 15:31 that the son always has everything available.
James 4:2: Ye lust, and have not: ye kill, and desire to have, and cannot obtain: ye fight and war, yet ye have not, because ye ask not.
Contradiction with Romans 11:22
This verse speaks of the severity of God towards those who fall, unlike the unconditional access and acceptance seen in Luke 15:31.
Romans 11:22: Behold therefore the goodness and severity of God: on them which fell, severity; but toward thee, goodness, if thou continue in [his] goodness: otherwise thou also shalt be cut off.
Contradiction with Galatians 6:7
It emphasizes reaping what one sows, perhaps contradicting the idea of unconditional entitlement seen in Luke 15:31.
Galatians 6:7: Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.
Contradiction with Matthew 25:29
This verse suggests a conditional granting based on what one has, whereas Luke 15:31 implies continuous access to wealth regardless of actions.
Matthew 25:29: For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 4:7
This verse questions boasting about things received, contradicting the implicit understanding in Luke 15:31 of having all as an inherent right.
1 Corinthians 4:7: For who maketh thee to differ [from another]? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive [it], why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received [it]? [maketh...: Gr. distinguisheth thee]
Paradox #1
The potential contradiction in Luke 15:31 could be related to the theme of fairness and grace. The verse implies that everything the father has belongs to the elder son, which might seem unfair considering the father's forgiveness and celebration of the younger son's return. This might appear inconsistent with the idea of equal grace and reward for both sons. However, it's important to recognize that the parable aims to highlight the father's love and grace rather than strict fairness by human standards.
Paradox #2
The verse is part of the story of the Prodigal Son. Some see a contradiction in how the father responds to the two sons, pointing out a possible inconsistency in fairness. While the older brother is loyal, he feels unfairly treated compared to the younger brother who squandered his inheritance but is welcomed back with open arms. This tension highlights potential conflicts regarding justice and grace.
Paradox #3
In Luke 15:31, there might be seen a moral conflict where the father assures his older son that everything he has is also the son's. This can be seen as inconsistent because the older son feels overlooked and unappreciated for his loyalty and hard work compared to the celebration for the return of the prodigal younger son. This may seem unfair to the older child, creating tension between reward for steadfastness versus grace and forgiveness.