Contradiction with Matthew 5:17
Romans 10:4 suggests Christ is the end of the law, but Matthew 5:17 states that Christ did not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it.
Matthew 5:17: Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:10
Romans 10:4 implies righteousness without adhering to the law, whereas Galatians 3:10 emphasizes that those who rely on following the law are under a curse if they do not continue to follow all of it.
Galatians 3:10: For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed [is] every one that continueth not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them.
Contradiction with James 2:24
Romans 10:4 implies justification is apart from the law, but James 2:24 states that a person is justified by works and not by faith only, highlighting the importance of deeds in following the law.
James 2:24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Contradiction with Matthew 19:17
Romans 10:4 suggests an end to the law for righteousness, while Matthew 19:17 implies the continued importance of keeping the commandments to enter into life.
Matthew 19:17: And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Paradox #1
Some people see a contradiction in the message about the role of the law. On one hand, this verse seems to suggest that faith in Christ means the law is no longer necessary for righteousness. However, other parts of the Bible emphasize following the law and maintaining its importance. This can create confusion about how the law and faith in Christ work together in achieving righteousness.
Paradox #2
Romans 10:4 could be seen as contradictory or inconsistent when comparing the message about the law in the Old Testament (where following the law is emphasized) with the message in Romans about faith in Christ bringing an end to the law for righteousness. Some interpret it as a shift from law-based righteousness to faith-based righteousness, creating tension with earlier teachings that emphasize adherence to the law.
Paradox #3
One potential contradiction or conflict with Romans 10:4 is the discussion about whether or not the law is still applicable to Christians. Some interpret this verse as saying that the law (from the Old Testament) is no longer necessary because of Christ. This can be seen as inconsistent with parts of the Bible that emphasize following the law. Different Christian groups interpret this differently, which has led to debates about how Christians should view the law.
Paradox #4
Some people might see a contradiction or conflict in this verse because it seems to suggest that following the law is no longer necessary once someone believes. This might seem to contradict other parts of the Bible that emphasize the importance of adhering to moral laws. It might look like it's creating tension between faith and actions, leading to confusion on whether just believing is enough or if one's actions also matter.