Contradiction with Matthew 6:26
While Psalms 50:10 suggests God's ownership over all beasts, Matthew 6:26 focuses on God's provision for them, highlighting possibly a lack of human ownership.
Matthew 6:26: Behold the fowls of the air: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they?
Contradiction with Genesis 1:28
Psalms 50:10 states God's dominion over every beast, whereas Genesis 1:28 grants humans dominion over animals.
Genesis 1:28: And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth. [moveth: Heb. creepeth]
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 2:7
Psalms 50:10 claims God's possession of animals, while 1 Samuel 2:7 asserts that God elevates or lowers people, possibly challenging the idea of sole divine ownership.
1 Samuel 2:7: The LORD maketh poor, and maketh rich: he bringeth low, and lifteth up.
Contradiction with Colossians 1:16
Psalms 50:10 insists on God's ownership of animals, yet Colossians 1:16 posits that all things were created for God, not directly mentioning possession.
Colossians 1:16: For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether [they be] thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:
Contradiction with Proverbs 12:10
Psalms 50:10 indicates divine ownership, whereas Proverbs 12:10 emphasizes human responsibility towards animals, suggesting shared dominion.
Proverbs 12:10: A righteous [man] regardeth the life of his beast: but the tender mercies of the wicked [are] cruel. [tender...: or, bowels]
Contradiction with Ecclesiastes 3:19
Psalms 50:10 stresses God's control over animals, but Ecclesiastes 3:19 equates the fate of humans and animals, questioning levels of ownership.
Ecclesiastes 3:19: For that which befalleth the sons of men befalleth beasts; even one thing befalleth them: as the one dieth, so dieth the other; yea, they have all one breath; so that a man hath no preeminence above a beast: for all [is] vanity.
Paradox #1
Psalms 50:10 talks about God's ownership of all the animals. One potential doctrinal conflict could be with the concept of human free will or stewardship, as this verse might suggest that humans have less ownership or control over their environment than they might think. However, this is often reconciled in theology by highlighting the responsibility given to humans to care for the creation.
Paradox #2
The verse suggests that every animal belongs to a single entity, which could conflict with scientific understandings of ecology and biodiversity. Science views animals as part of complex ecosystems, with no single owner. This verse could also conflict with evolutionary biology, which sees species as interconnected but not owned by a single entity.
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict could arise from the idea of divine ownership versus human stewardship. If everything belongs to God, some might question why humans are given the responsibility to care for the earth and its creatures. This could lead to conflicting views on environmental responsibility and resource management.