Contradiction with Ezekiel 18:32
This verse speaks of God having no pleasure in the death of anyone, contradicting the implication that the days were shortened specifically for the elect's survival, implying some disregard for others.
Ezekiel 18:32: For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord GOD: wherefore turn [yourselves], and live ye. [yourselves: or, others]
Contradiction with 2 Peter 3:9
This verse suggests that God is patient and not willing that any should perish, which contrasts with the urgency and selectivity of Mark 13:20 where the days are shortened only for the sake of a few.
2 Peter 3:9: The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Contradiction with 1 Timothy 2:4
This verse indicates that God desires all men to be saved, which contradicts the notion of sparing days only for the elect in Mark 13:20, implying not all are considered.
1 Timothy 2:4: Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
Contradiction with John 3:16
This verse expresses the universal nature of God's love and promise of eternal life to everyone, contrasting with the selective focus on the elect in Mark 13:20.
John 3:16: For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
Contradiction with Romans 5:18
This passage highlights justification and life offered to all men through Christ, contradicting Mark 13:20's notion of intervention only for the elect.
Romans 5:18: Therefore as by the offence of one [judgment came] upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one [the free gift came] upon all men unto justification of life. [by the offence...: or, by one offence] [by the righteousness...: or, by one righteousness]
Paradox #1
Mark 13:20 might be seen as conflicting with the idea of God's omnipotence or predetermined plan. If it suggests a change due to the actions of humans, it could raise questions about how this fits with God's all-knowing and unchanging nature. However, such interpretations depend heavily on theological perspectives.
Paradox #2
Mark 13:20 talks about God shortening days for the sake of the "elect." A potential doctrinal conflict could arise when considering the nature of divine omniscience and omnipotence. If God is all-knowing and all-powerful, some people might question why God would need to change the timeline at all. Others might ask how this aligns with the belief in God's unchanging nature. These questions could lead to discussions on how divine intervention and free will interact in the world.
Paradox #3
The potential contradiction in Mark 13:20 might involve the idea that a select group is saved due to divine intervention, which could raise questions about fairness and free will. If some people are spared suffering or destruction only because they are "chosen," it might seem inconsistent with the belief in a just and impartial God who treats all people equally.