Contradiction with Proverbs 29:2
This verse states that "when the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice," suggesting that the preservation of power by the righteous is beneficial, unlike the notion in Luke 1:52 where the powerful are removed.
Proverbs 29:2: When the righteous are in authority, the people rejoice: but when the wicked beareth rule, the people mourn. [in...: or, increased]
Contradiction with Romans 13:1
This verse calls for submission to governing authorities, indicating that their power comes from God, which contrasts with the dethroning of the powerful described in Luke 1:52.
Romans 13:1: Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. [ordained: or, ordered]
Contradiction with 1 Peter 2:13-14
These verses encourage submission to every ordinance of man and honor to the king, which may contrast with the overturning of power described in Luke 1:52.
1 Peter 2:13-14: Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme;
Contradiction with Daniel 4:17
This verse suggests that God deliberately sets up and removes kings to demonstrate His sovereignty, rather than merely pulling down rulers, which seems more selective than the broader action in Luke 1:52.
Daniel 4:17: This matter [is] by the decree of the watchers, and the demand by the word of the holy ones: to the intent that the living may know that the most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 2:7-8
These verses speak to God both making poor and rich, bringing low and lifting up, presenting a more balanced view of elevating and demotion than the focus on bringing down in Luke 1:52.
1 Samuel 2:7-8: The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up.
Paradox #1
This verse talks about God bringing down the powerful and lifting up the humble. A possible contradiction could be seen in the idea of taking power away from some people while giving it to others. This could be viewed as inconsistent if power dynamics are not evenly addressed or if it seems to suggest that it's always wrong to be in a position of power, rather than the way power is used being the issue. Additionally, it might be seen as conflicting with the reality where often the powerful remain in control.