Contradiction with Romans 13:9
This verse states that the commandments, including the prohibition against adultery, are summed up in loving your neighbor, suggesting love is the primary concern which may not directly address thoughts or intentions as Matthew 5:28 does.
Romans 13:9: For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if [there be] any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 7:9
This verse advises marrying to avoid burning with passion, suggesting a solution to lust that may not address the heart's intentions as Matthew 5:28 emphasizes.
1 Corinthians 7:9: But if they cannot contain, let them marry: for it is better to marry than to burn.
Paradox #1
Some people see a contradiction in this verse when it is compared to other biblical teachings on sin and forgiveness. The verse may seem strict or absolute in its stance on thought and desire, while other passages focus on the importance of actions or the ability to seek forgiveness. This can cause confusion about the severity of sin and how it is recognized or forgiven within Christian teachings.
Paradox #2
Some people see a contradiction with this verse and the idea of thought versus action found in other parts of the Bible. In this verse, having a lustful thought is equated with committing an act. This may seem to conflict with teachings where actions are more condemnable than thoughts, as many parts of the Bible suggest punishment or sin is more directly linked to physical deeds rather than internal thoughts.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or inconsistency could be related to differing views on morality and behavior over time. In ancient cultural contexts, attitudes toward lust and adultery might have been interpreted differently compared to modern understandings. Additionally, interpretations of the verse could vary between different religious traditions and historical periods, leading to conflicts in understanding or application.
Paradox #4
Matthew 5:28 might raise questions about the conflict between thought and action. Some people may find it challenging to reconcile the idea that having a thought can be equated with committing an action, as it suggests moral accountability for internal thoughts even if no physical deed occurs. This idea can be seen as conflicting because thoughts and actions traditionally hold different moral weights.