There is a contradiction with a particular interrpetation of the Bible, the one you happen to favor, not with the Bible itself.
If interpretation is the issue, then you have agreed that we are a differing hermeneutic than what you use.
We are making progress.
We rely on scripture foremost, and then, history, reason, and experience.
You rely on scripture and tradition. My sense is that the tradition relied upon is carefully selected. I would claim that the dogma preceded the study rather than vice versa.
Such an eisegetical method is backward to those who advocate sola scriptura.