Contradiction with Leviticus 19:18
This verse instructs to love your neighbor as yourself, which contradicts Deuteronomy 21:13's context of marrying a captive after mourning.
Leviticus 19:18: Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I [am] the LORD.
Contradiction with Matthew 5:44
This verse tells to love your enemies, which contradicts the treatment of captives as seen in Deuteronomy 21:13.
Matthew 5:44: But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
Contradiction with Galatians 3:28
This verse speaks of equality in Christ, contrasting with Deuteronomy 21:13's allowance for taking captives as wives.
Galatians 3:28: There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.
Contradiction with Exodus 21:16
This verse condemns kidnapping, contrasting with the context of taking captives in Deuteronomy 21:13.
Exodus 21:16: And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
Contradiction with Matthew 7:12
Known as the Golden Rule, this verse contradicts with the actions permitted in Deuteronomy 21:13 regarding captives.
Matthew 7:12: Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets.
Paradox #1
Deuteronomy 21:13 could be seen as conflicting with the biblical principles of love, compassion, and the treatment of others with respect. The verse is part of a passage that deals with the treatment of female captives in war, which might seem inconsistent with the overall biblical message of valuing all human life and upholding human dignity. This could be perceived as contradictory for those who interpret the Bible as advocating for equal respect and care for all individuals.
Paradox #2
This verse, which deals with the treatment of women captured during warfare, might be seen as inconsistent with modern views on human rights and the treatment of women. It reflects a historical context where conquered peoples, including women, were often treated as property. This can conflict with contemporary beliefs in equality and individual rights.
Paradox #3
This verse could present a moral conflict because it involves taking a woman captive and then making her your wife. This raises ethical concerns about consent and the treatment of individuals as property, which may conflict with modern values of human rights and personal freedoms.