Contradiction with Romans 2:6
Romans 2:6 states that God "will render to every man according to his deeds," suggesting that individual actions can impact divine judgment, whereas Romans 3:5 questions the righteousness of God in inflicting wrath if human unrighteousness demonstrates His righteousness.
Romans 2:6: Who will render to every man according to his deeds:
Contradiction with Romans 2:13
Romans 2:13 claims that "the doers of the law shall be justified," implying that adherence to the law is connected to righteousness, in contrast to Romans 3:5, which raises the point about human unrighteousness highlighting God’s righteousness.
Romans 2:13: (For not the hearers of the law [are] just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.
Contradiction with James 2:24
James 2:24 asserts that "by works a man is justified, and not by faith only," emphasizing deeds in justification, which contradicts the underlying argument in Romans 3:5 about the role of unrighteousness in showcasing God's righteousness.
James 2:24: Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only.
Contradiction with Proverbs 11:18
Proverbs 11:18 states that a "righteous reward" comes from sowing righteousness, implying a positive correlation between righteous acts and divine reward, conflicting with Romans 3:5 which explores whether unrighteousness can highlight God’s righteousness.
Proverbs 11:18: The wicked worketh a deceitful work: but to him that soweth righteousness [shall be] a sure reward.
Paradox #1
The contradiction or conflict related to Romans 3:5 could be the challenge of understanding how God's justice is consistent with human unrighteousness. Some people might see it as contradictory to claim that our wrongdoing could somehow serve to highlight God's righteousness. This can lead to debates about moral responsibility and divine justice.
Paradox #2
Romans 3:5 could present a contradiction or conflict because it raises the question of whether God's righteousness is highlighted by human unrighteousness. This can be confusing because it suggests that doing wrong might somehow serve a greater good, which conflicts with the general moral principle of not doing harm or evil.