Contradiction with Ezekiel 18:21-22
These verses assert that if a wicked person turns from their sins and follows righteous ways, their past transgressions will not be mentioned; which contrasts with Revelation 2:5 where the warning of removing the candlestick implies consequences for past actions despite repentance.
Ezekiel 18:21-22: But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Contradiction with Hebrews 10:17
This verse states that God will remember sins no more, which contrasts with Revelation 2:5 suggesting that past deeds are still considered, leading to potential removal of the candlestick.
Hebrews 10:17: And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more. [And their: some copies have, Then he said, And their]
Contradiction with Micah 7:19
This verse explains that God will cast sins into the depths of the sea and forget them, differing from Revelation 2:5 where there seems to remain a threat of punishment if the past actions are not corrected.
Micah 7:19: He will turn again, he will have compassion upon us; he will subdue our iniquities; and thou wilt cast all their sins into the depths of the sea.
Contradiction with Isaiah 43:25
God proclaims to blot out transgressions and not remember sins in this verse, which contradicts the implication in Revelation 2:5 where not repenting leads to removal of the candlestick, suggesting remembrance of past actions.
Isaiah 43:25: I, [even] I, [am] he that blotteth out thy transgressions for mine own sake, and will not remember thy sins.
Contradiction with Psalm 103:12
This verse declares that transgressions are removed as far as the east is from the west, which contrasts Revelation 2:5 where there remains an accountability and potential consequence if repentance is not forthcoming.
Psalm 103:12: As far as the east is from the west, [so] far hath he removed our transgressions from us.
Paradox #1
Revelation 2:5 contains a warning to repent and return to previous practices, or face removal of their lampstand. A theological inconsistency might arise regarding the concept of God's unconditional love and forgiveness. Some might see a conflict between the idea of God being loving and forgiving and threatening punishment or removal if certain actions aren't followed. This can lead to questions about the nature of divine forgiveness and whether conditions are placed on it.
Paradox #2
Revelation 2:5 warns about remembering, repenting, and returning to earlier deeds, or else facing consequences. One contradiction could be the idea of repentance and divine punishment, which contrasts with some interpretations of biblical teachings emphasizing unconditional grace and forgiveness. The potential conflict lies in balancing the concepts of grace and accountability.
Paradox #3
Revelation 2:5 could present a contradiction for some because it emphasizes the need for repentance and warns of consequences if one does not return to their 'first love' or original ways. Some might see a conflict between the idea of unconditional love and the threat of losing one's standing or lampstand if they fail to repent, which can seem conditional. This could be seen as inconsistent with the notion of grace and forgiveness that is also present in the Bible.