Contradiction with Isaiah 58:5
This verse challenges the sincerity and purpose of fasting, emphasizing that true fasting involves just actions and humility, contrasting with Zechariah 7:5 where fasting is questioned as being for God.
Isaiah 58:5: Is it such a fast that I have chosen? a day for a man to afflict his soul? [is it] to bow down his head as a bulrush, and to spread sackcloth and ashes [under him]? wilt thou call this a fast, and an acceptable day to the LORD? [a day...: or, to afflict his soul for a day?]
Contradiction with Matthew 6:16-18
Jesus teaches that fasting should be done in secrecy to God and not for public display, which contrasts with the notion in Zechariah 7:5 questioning whether past fasts were genuinely for God.
Matthew 6:16-18: Moreover when ye fast, be not, as the hypocrites, of a sad countenance: for they disfigure their faces, that they may appear unto men to fast. Verily I say unto you, They have their reward.
Contradiction with Joel 2:12-13
God calls for a return to Him with fasting, weeping, and mourning, encouraging a heartfelt approach which contrasts with the notion in Zechariah 7:5 where fasts performed might not have been for God.
Joel 2:12-13: Therefore also now, saith the LORD, turn ye [even] to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning:
Contradiction with Jeremiah 14:12
Here, God declares He will not accept their fasting, contrasting Zechariah 7:5 by emphasizing that fasting without rightful intention or behavior is not recognized by God.
Jeremiah 14:12: When they fast, I will not hear their cry; and when they offer burnt offering and an oblation, I will not accept them: but I will consume them by the sword, and by the famine, and by the pestilence.
Paradox #1
Zechariah 7:5 might present a contradiction or inconsistency in questioning the sincerity of religious rituals. The potential conflict could arise if people perform acts of fasting and mourning out of routine or for self-serving reasons, rather than genuine devotion or compassion. This can challenge the purpose and authenticity of such practices, highlighting a disconnect between actions and true moral intent.