Contradiction with James 5:12
This verse reinforces Matthew 5:37 rather than contradicting it, urging not to swear and letting a yes be yes and no be no.
James 5:12: But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yea be yea; and [your] nay, nay; lest ye fall into condemnation.
Contradiction with Matthew 23:16-22
The passage describes Jesus criticizing the practice of swearing oaths by things, which aligns with the simplicity urged in Matthew 5:37 rather than contradicts it.
Matthew 23:16-22: Woe unto you, [ye] blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor!
Contradiction with Judges 11:30-31
Jephthah makes a vow to the Lord, suggesting more complexity in communication with God than the simplicity of yes or no as in Matthew 5:37.
Judges 11:30-31: And Jephthah vowed a vow unto the LORD, and said, If thou shalt without fail deliver the children of Ammon into mine hands,
Contradiction with Numbers 30:2
This verse discusses the importance of keeping vows to the Lord, implying the need for oath-making, which contrasts with the directive to simply say yes or no.
Numbers 30:2: If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth. [break: Heb. profane]
Contradiction with Hebrews 6:16-17
This passage mentions that oaths are used for confirmation and end disputes, which contrasts with the instruction to avoid oaths in Matthew 5:37.
Hebrews 6:16-17: For men verily swear by the greater: and an oath for confirmation [is] to them an end of all strife.
Contradiction with Genesis 22:16
God swearing by Himself to Abraham emphasizes the use of an oath, which contrasts with the directive against swearing in Matthew 5:37.
Genesis 22:16: And said, By myself have I sworn, saith the LORD, for because thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only [son]:
Paradox #1
Matthew 5:37 could be seen as inconsistent when compared to some parts of the Old Testament that permit or require taking oaths. In the Old Testament, oaths were sometimes used to confirm truthfulness or solemn promises, which seems to contrast with the simplicity encouraged by this verse.
Paradox #2
One potential contradiction in the verse could be the expectation for people to communicate clearly and truthfully at all times. Real-life situations can be complex, requiring nuance and flexibility in communication, which might not always align with the directness the verse suggests. This could conflict with situations where more elaborate explanations are necessary or when social norms require a degree of politeness or tact that goes beyond a simple "yes" or "no."