Contradiction with Galatians 5:16
Romans 13:14 advises to put on the Lord Jesus Christ and not fulfill lusts, while Galatians 5:16 suggests walking in the Spirit to avoid lust, presenting different modes of rejecting lust.
Galatians 5:16: [This] I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh. [ye...: or, fulfil not]
Contradiction with Matthew 6:25
Romans 13:14 speaks of putting on Christ and not focusing on flesh desires, whereas Matthew 6:25 advises not to worry about life needs, focusing instead on God's provision.
Matthew 6:25: 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 1 Corinthians 6:12
Romans 13:14 instructs to avoid fleshly lusts, while 1 Corinthians 6:12 allows actions if they are not enslaving, implying that some permissible actions may seem indulgent.
1 Corinthians 6:12: All things are lawful unto me, but all things are not expedient: all things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of any. [expedient: or, profitable]
Contradiction with Ecclesiastes 3:13
Romans 13:14 warns against fulfilling fleshly desires, in contrast to Ecclesiastes 3:13, which states that finding enjoyment in toil is a gift from God.
Ecclesiastes 3:13: And also that every man should eat and drink, and enjoy the good of all his labour, it [is] the gift of God.
Contradiction with Colossians 2:21-23
Romans 13:14 emphasizes spiritual transformation while Colossians 2:21-23 criticizes human rules for severe treatment of the body that fail to restrain indulgence.
Colossians 2:21-23: (Touch not; taste not; handle not;
Paradox #1
Romans 13:14 might present a contradiction or inconsistency when considering its call to "put on the Lord Jesus Christ" and make no provision for the flesh. On one hand, this promotes a high moral standard by focusing on spiritual growth and avoiding sin. On the other hand, it can conflict with the idea that human desires and needs, which are part of the "flesh," are natural and can be inherently good. This tension could be interpreted as a struggle between denying one's natural tendencies versus integrating them in a balanced way.