Contradiction with Mark 10:21
Romans 8:32 speaks of God giving "all things" freely, while Mark 10:21 suggests selling possessions to gain treasure in heaven.
Mark 10:21: Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
Contradiction with Luke 14:33
Romans 8:32 implies provision of all things, whereas Luke 14:33 requires forsaking all to be a disciple.
Luke 14:33: So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.
Contradiction with Matthew 19:24
Romans 8:32 indicates freely giving, but Matthew 19:24 emphasizes difficulty for the rich to enter heaven.
Matthew 19:24: And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.
Contradiction with James 2:5
Romans 8:32 suggests being freely provided for, yet James 2:5 indicates the poor are chosen to be rich in faith.
James 2:5: Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? [of the: or, of that]
Contradiction with Hebrews 12:6-7
Romans 8:32 speaks of a giving God, whereas Hebrews 12:6-7 discusses how God disciplines those He loves.
Hebrews 12:6-7: For whom the Lord loveth he chasteneth, and scourgeth every son whom he receiveth.
Contradiction with 1 John 2:15-16
Romans 8:32 highlights God giving all things, yet 1 John 2:15-16 warns against loving worldly things.
1 John 2:15-16: Love not the world, neither the things [that are] in the world. If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.
Contradiction with Matthew 10:38-39
Romans 8:32 implies abundance in giving, while Matthew 10:38-39 speaks about losing life to find it.
Matthew 10:38-39: And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not worthy of me.
Paradox #1
The possible contradiction in Romans 8:32 might arise when considering how God, who did not spare His own Son, appears to act in a way that seems inconsistent with the promise of a loving and protective deity. Some might find it challenging to reconcile the idea of a loving God with the sacrificial act of delivering His Son for others. This tension might be seen as contradictory when paired with teachings about God's unfailing love and care. However, theologians argue that this action demonstrates the ultimate expression of God's love and commitment to humanity.