Contradiction with Numbers 33:55
This verse warns that if the Israelites do not drive out the inhabitants of the land, those left will trouble them, whereas Nehemiah 9:22 mentions lands given to them by God, implying successful conquest.
Numbers 33:55: But if ye will not drive out the inhabitants of the land from before you; then it shall come to pass, that those which ye let remain of them [shall be] pricks in your eyes, and thorns in your sides, and shall vex you in the land wherein ye dwell.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 7:2
This verse instructs the Israelites to utterly destroy the nations given to them and make no covenants, contrasting with Nehemiah 9:22, which implies nations were given and inhabited without such specific destruction mentioned.
Deuteronomy 7:2: And when the LORD thy God shall deliver them before thee; thou shalt smite them, [and] utterly destroy them; thou shalt make no covenant with them, nor shew mercy unto them:
Contradiction with Joshua 13:1-6
This passage speaks of the lands that remain to be possessed, even as Nehemiah 9:22 discusses the lands already given, highlighting a distinction between possession and promise.
Joshua 13:1-6: Now Joshua was old [and] stricken in years; and the LORD said unto him, Thou art old [and] stricken in years, and there remaineth yet very much land to be possessed. [to...: Heb. to possess it]
Contradiction with Judges 1:19
This verse notes that Judah could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley because they had iron chariots, suggesting a limitation not mentioned in Nehemiah 9:22, which recounts successful possession of lands.
Judges 1:19: And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out [the inhabitants of] the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron. [drave...: or, possessed the mountain]
Contradiction with Psalms 44:3
Here it is stated that they did not conquer the land by their own sword, but because God favored them, implicitly challenging human contributions as might be interpreted differently in Nehemiah 9:22’s account.
Psalms 44:3: For they got not the land in possession by their own sword, neither did their own arm save them: but thy right hand, and thine arm, and the light of thy countenance, because thou hadst a favour unto them.
Contradiction with 2 Samuel 8:3
This verse details King David's battles to establish control, whereas Nehemiah 9:22 focuses on the land distribution by divine intervention, omitting the ongoing struggles.
2 Samuel 8:3: David smote also Hadadezer, the son of Rehob, king of Zobah, as he went to recover his border at the river Euphrates. [Hadadezer: or, Hadarezer]
Contradiction with 1 Kings 9:20-21
These verses mention that Solomon conscripted the remaining peoples, which implies continued presence and labor of original inhabitants, contrasting with the notion of complete possession in Nehemiah 9:22.
1 Kings 9:20-21: [And] all the people [that were] left of the Amorites, Hittites, Perizzites, Hivites, and Jebusites, which [were] not of the children of Israel,
Contradiction with Psalm 106:34-36
This passage criticizes Israel for not destroying the nations as God commanded, unlike Nehemiah 9:22, which speaks only of receiving lands from God.
Psalm 106:34-36: They did not destroy the nations, concerning whom the LORD commanded them:
Contradiction with Judges 2:1-3
In these verses, God reproves Israel for making covenants with the remaining nations, suggesting failure in total conquest, contrasting with the claim of dominion in Nehemiah 9:22.
Judges 2:1-3: And an angel of the LORD came up from Gilgal to Bochim, and said, I made you to go up out of Egypt, and have brought you unto the land which I sware unto your fathers; and I said, I will never break my covenant with you. [angel: or, messenger]
Paradox #1
Nehemiah 9:22 speaks of God giving lands to the Israelites by displacing other nations. The contradiction might be seen in the idea of taking land from others, which could conflict with modern views on justice and fairness. Some could see it as inconsistent with the concept of loving your neighbor or treating others with compassion and respect.