Contradiction with Matthew 6:25-26
These verses emphasize reliance on God's provision, contradicting Revelation 13:17's implication of dependence on human systems for survival.
Matthew 6:25-26: Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink; nor yet for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than meat, and the body than raiment?
Contradiction with Matthew 4:4
This verse teaches that man shall not live by bread alone, which contradicts the notion in Revelation 13:17 of needing physical necessities in exchange for allegiance.
Matthew 4:4: But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.
Contradiction with Luke 12:24
This verse reassures believers that God provides for their needs, contradicting the idea in Revelation 13:17 of lacking necessities without the mark.
Luke 12:24: Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?
Contradiction with Philippians 4:19
This verse promises that God will supply all needs, which contradicts the dependency on the mark mentioned in Revelation 13:17.
Philippians 4:19: But my God shall supply all your need according to his riches in glory by Christ Jesus.
Contradiction with Psalm 37:25
This verse notes the righteousness will not be forsaken or lacking bread, contrasting the scenario of Revelation 13:17.
Psalm 37:25: I have been young, and [now] am old; yet have I not seen the righteous forsaken, nor his seed begging bread.
Contradiction with Matthew 6:33
This verse states that seeking God's kingdom leads to all needs being provided, contrasting the way Revelation 13:17 ties sustenance to receiving the mark.
Matthew 6:33: But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.
Contradiction with John 6:35
In this verse, Jesus claims to be the bread of life, promising eternal satisfaction, which contrasts the transactional nature of survival in Revelation 13:17.
John 6:35: And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
Contradiction with Psalm 34:10
It asserts that those who seek the Lord lack no good thing, contradicting the lack without the mark in Revelation 13:17.
Psalm 34:10: The young lions do lack, and suffer hunger: but they that seek the LORD shall not want any good [thing].
Contradiction with Isaiah 55:1
This verse invites all to receive sustenance without money, countering the buying and selling restriction in Revelation 13:17.
Isaiah 55:1: Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.
Contradiction with Hebrews 13:5
God's promise to never leave or forsake contrasts the notion of abandonment without the mark in Revelation 13:17.
Hebrews 13:5: [Let your] conversation [be] without covetousness; [and be] content with such things as ye have: for he hath said, I will never leave thee, nor forsake thee.
Paradox #1
Revelation 13:17 could be seen as conflicting with teachings about salvation and the character of God, as it implies that economic participation is restricted in a way that seems unfair or coercive. This may seem inconsistent with the idea of a loving and just God who desires all people to have free will and equal opportunities.
Paradox #2
Revelation 13:17 presents potential contradictions or conflicts related to the interpretation of the "mark of the beast" and economic control. Some Christians see this as conflicting with the belief in free will and personal freedom, as it describes a scenario where individuals are forced to have a mark to buy or sell. Others may see interpretive conflicts around whether this is a literal or symbolic mark, creating differences in understanding prophecy and eschatology (the study of end times).
Paradox #3
The contradiction or conflict in this verse might be seen in the idea of restricting people's ability to buy or sell unless they have a specific mark, which can be viewed as limiting personal freedom and agency. This could contrast with the broader biblical themes of free will and the moral value of individual choice.