Contradiction with Proverbs 21:31
While Psalms 108:13 emphasizes deliverance and victory through God, Proverbs 21:31 suggests that safety and readiness come from human preparation.
Proverbs 21:31: The horse [is] prepared against the day of battle: but safety [is] of the LORD. [safety: or, victory]
Contradiction with 2 Chronicles 14:11
In contrast to Psalms 108:13 where deliverance is solely attributed to God, this verse demonstrates reliance on military strength alongside divine help.
2 Chronicles 14:11: And Asa cried unto the LORD his God, and said, LORD, [it is] nothing with thee to help, whether with many, or with them that have no power: help us, O LORD our God; for we rest on thee, and in thy name we go against this multitude. O LORD, thou [art] our God; let not man prevail against thee. [man: or, mortal man]
Contradiction with Jeremiah 17:5
This verse warns against reliance on human strength, contradicting any interpretation of Psalms 108:13 that considers human action in achieving victory.
Jeremiah 17:5: Thus saith the LORD; Cursed [be] the man that trusteth in man, and maketh flesh his arm, and whose heart departeth from the LORD.
Contradiction with Isaiah 31:1
Psalms 108:13 emphasizes the need for God's help, while Isaiah 31:1 contradicts this by criticizing those who seek help from others instead of trusting in God.
Isaiah 31:1: Woe to them that go down to Egypt for help; and stay on horses, and trust in chariots, because [they are] many; and in horsemen, because they are very strong; but they look not unto the Holy One of Israel, neither seek the LORD!
Contradiction with Jonah 2:8
This verse points out the futility of relying on idols, providing a counterpoint to Psalms 108:13 by emphasizing misplaced dependence, not aligning victory with God alone.
Jonah 2:8: They that observe lying vanities forsake their own mercy.
Paradox #1
Psalms 108:13 talks about gaining victory and strength through God. A potential contradiction or conflict could arise if someone interprets this to mean that relying solely on divine intervention negates the need for personal action or responsibility. This could conflict with the idea that humans should actively work to solve their problems and make moral decisions.