Contradiction with James 2:1
This verse emphasizes not showing favoritism, while Matthew 20:15 suggests the right to do as one pleases with one's own, potentially implying favoritism.
James 2:1: My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, [the Lord] of glory, with respect of persons.
Contradiction with Acts 10:34
This verse states that God shows no partiality, contradicting the idea of personal discretion and favoritism in Matthew 20:15.
Acts 10:34: Then Peter opened [his] mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
Contradiction with Romans 2:11
It declares there is no respect of persons with God, which contradicts the autonomy over decisions that may appear partial in Matthew 20:15.
Romans 2:11: For there is no respect of persons with God.
Contradiction with Proverbs 28:21
Warns against showing partiality, contrasting the notion of individual choice in rewarding people as in Matthew 20:15.
Proverbs 28:21: To have respect of persons [is] not good: for for a piece of bread [that] man will transgress.
Paradox #1
Some people might see a conflict in the verse about fairness. It suggests that someone can do what they want with their own belongings, even if it seems unfair to others. This might seem inconsistent with other teachings about fairness and equality.
Paradox #2
Matthew 20:15 could be seen as presenting a challenge when it comes to ideas of fairness and justice. Some might find it contradictory to human notions of what is fair, as the verse suggests that it's acceptable for someone to be generous even if it seems unfair to others. This can conflict with human expectations that everyone should receive the same reward for the same amount of work. However, it's often understood as a lesson on divine generosity rather than human fairness.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in Matthew 20:15 could be seen in the idea of fairness versus generosity. Some might think it's unfair for a landowner to pay workers the same wage regardless of hours worked, while others see it as an act of generosity. This could create a conflict between the human sense of fairness and the moral value of being generous and kind.