Contradiction with Exodus 21:24
Philemon 1:19 suggests restitution in a form of debt repayment by Paul, while Exodus 21:24 introduces the principle of direct retribution, "eye for eye," contrasting with personal settlement.
Exodus 21:24: Eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot,
Contradiction with Matthew 6:12
Philemon 1:19 implies repayment of a debt, whereas Matthew 6:12 teaches forgiveness of debts as part of the Lord's Prayer, suggesting release rather than repayment.
Matthew 6:12: And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.
Contradiction with Luke 6:30
Philemon 1:19 involves a promise to repay, whereas Luke 6:30 advises giving without expecting repayment, contrary to the concept of settling debts.
Luke 6:30: Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask [them] not again.
Contradiction with Romans 13:8
Philemon 1:19 focuses on settling a particular debt, yet Romans 13:8 emphasizes owing no one anything except love, which implies fulfilling moral rather than financial obligations.
Romans 13:8: Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
Paradox #1
The contradiction or conflict in Philemon 1:19 could arise if one interprets the verse within the broader context of issues like slavery and forgiveness. The letter to Philemon involves Paul urging Philemon to forgive and accept his runaway slave Onesimus as a brother in Christ. Some readers might see a conflict between advocating for love and forgiveness while indirectly upholding the institution of slavery, as it doesn't outright condemn it. This can be seen as inconsistent with modern views on human rights and equality.