Contradiction with James 2:24
This verse states that a person is justified by works, not by faith only, which can be seen as contradicting Romans 3:31 that emphasizes faith establishing the law.
James 2:24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Contradiction with Galatians 2:16
This verse emphasizes that a person is not justified by the works of the law but by faith in Jesus Christ, potentially conflicting with Romans 3:31's view on law and faith.
Galatians 2:16: Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.
Contradiction with Galatians 3:10
This verse suggests that relying on the law leads to a curse, which seems contradictory to the affirmation of the law's establishment through faith in Romans 3:31.
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 Hebrews 7:18-19
This passage discusses the disannulling of a former commandment, suggesting the law is weak and unprofitable, which could be seen as conflicting with the idea of the law being upheld by faith.
Hebrews 7:18-19: For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof.
Contradiction with Ephesians 2:15
This verse speaks of abolishing the law of commandments, which contradicts the notion in Romans 3:31 of faith establishing the law.
Ephesians 2:15: Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace;
Paradox #1
A possible contradiction in the verse could be the perceived inconsistency between faith and following the law. Some might view it as conflicting with earlier teachings where faith is emphasized over strict adherence to religious laws. This could lead to confusion about whether faith alone is sufficient or if following the law is still required.
Paradox #2
Romans 3:31 might seem to create a conflict because it talks about upholding the law even though a lot of the New Testament emphasizes faith over following the law. Some people might see this as inconsistent because it appears to support the importance of both, which could be confusing when trying to understand the role of religious laws versus faith in Christianity.
Paradox #3
The potential contradiction or inconsistency with Romans 3:31 arises from the tension between faith and law. Some might see a conflict in the idea that faith upholds the law, while other parts of the Bible suggest that faith, not the law, is what justifies believers. This can lead to confusion about whether following religious laws is necessary if faith alone is seen as sufficient for righteousness.