Contradiction with Proverbs 11:24
This verse suggests that withholding more than is meet can lead to poverty, whereas Ruth 2:16 exemplifies generous giving.
Proverbs 11:24: There is that scattereth, and yet increaseth; and [there is] that withholdeth more than is meet, but [it tendeth] to poverty.
Contradiction with Acts 20:35
This verse highlights the blessedness of giving rather than receiving, while Ruth 2:16 shows Boaz instructing others to leave grain for Ruth.
Acts 20:35: I have shewed you all things, how that so labouring ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said, It is more blessed to give than to receive.
Contradiction with Matthew 6:1
This verse warns against doing acts of righteousness to be seen by others; Ruth 2:16 depicts a kind act that could be observed by others.
Matthew 6:1: Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them: otherwise ye have no reward of your Father which is in heaven. [alms: or, righteousness] [of your: or, with your]
Contradiction with Luke 6:38
This verse emphasizes that giving leads to receiving, while Ruth 2:16 is more about intentional provision rather than reciprocity.
Luke 6:38: Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running over, shall men give into your bosom. For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be measured to you again.
Contradiction with Proverbs 19:17
This verse speaks about lending to the Lord by giving to the poor, showing a promise of repayment, while Ruth 2:16 details a straightforward act of generosity without mention of future returns.
Proverbs 19:17: He that hath pity upon the poor lendeth unto the LORD; and that which he hath given will he pay him again. [that which...: or, his deed]
Paradox #1
The moral conflict in that passage could arise from the idea of showing favoritism. While the act of leaving extra grain for Ruth can be seen as an act of kindness and generosity, it might also be perceived as unfair to others who are not given the same opportunity. This could lead to discussions about fairness and equality in how resources or help are distributed.