Contradiction with Genesis 38:8
This verse instructs Onan to fulfill his duty as a guardian-redeemer by fathering an heir for his deceased brother, Judah, which he neglects, reflecting a contradiction in fulfilling family obligations.
Genesis 38:8: And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.
Contradiction with Matthew 22:39
This verse emphasizes loving neighbors as oneself, presenting a moral duty to aid others, which contrasts the self-interest expressed in Ruth 4:6.
Matthew 22:39: On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Contradiction with Philippians 2:4
Urges individuals to not only look out for their interests but also the interests of others, opposing the kinsman's refusal in Ruth 4:6.
Philippians 2:4: Look not every man on his own things, but every man also on the things of others.
Contradiction with James 4:17
Indicates that knowing the good one ought to do and failing to do it is sin, conflicting with the kinsman’s choice to refuse the redeeming duty.
James 4:17: Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth [it] not, to him it is sin.
Contradiction with 1 John 3:17
Challenges withholding help from those in need when capable, which contradicts the kinsman’s decision to refuse redemption.
1 John 3:17: But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels [of compassion] from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?
Paradox #1
Ruth 4:6 might be seen as inconsistent with the earlier sense of familial obligation and redemption obligations within the Hebrew culture. In some interpretations, the unnamed kinsman-redeemer's refusal to redeem Ruth and Naomi's land could conflict with the sense of duty expected from a close relative to safeguard family legacy and honor. However, these cultural obligations and personal interests can sometimes conflict, leading to different interpretations of duty versus personal cost.
Paradox #2
Ruth 4:6 might present a contradiction if we consider the cultural and legal obligations described in the Bible about family and property redemption. In this verse, a kinsman-redeemer refuses to redeem Ruth and her family property, citing potential harm to his own estate. This could conflict with the biblical emphasis on family duty and caring for relatives, as it shows a prioritization of personal interests over familial obligations.
Paradox #3
Ruth 4:6 presents a conflict where the family guardian chooses not to redeem Ruth and Naomi's land because it might endanger his own estate. The moral inconsistency here could be seen in the guardian's unwillingness to fulfill his duty to family due to personal financial concerns, which contrasts with cultural expectations of loyalty and support within a family.