Contradiction with Exodus 22:16
This verse states that if a man seduces a virgin, he should pay a dowry and marry her, which contradicts the idea of only paying a dowry without marriage in Deuteronomy 22:28.
Exodus 22:16: And if a man entice a maid that is not betrothed, and lie with her, he shall surely endow her to be his wife.
Contradiction with 2 Samuel 13:14-16
In this narrative, King David's son Amnon rapes his sister Tamar, and despite the violation, there's no command for him to marry her, contradicting the marriage directive in Deuteronomy 22:28.
2 Samuel 13:14-16: Howbeit he would not hearken unto her voice: but, being stronger than she, forced her, and lay with her.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 24:1-4
This passage allows for divorce if a man finds something indecent about his wife, contrasting with the compulsory marriage commandment resulting from Deuteronomy 22:28.
Deuteronomy 24:1-4: When a man hath taken a wife, and married her, and it come to pass that she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some uncleanness in her: then let him write her a bill of divorcement, and give [it] in her hand, and send her out of his house. [some...: Heb. matter of nakedness] [divorcement: Heb. cutting off]
Paradox #1
Deuteronomy 22:28 has been critiqued for implying that a man who violates a woman could marry her, which seems inconsistent with later biblical teachings on justice, consent, and the respectful treatment of individuals. This could appear contradictory to the values of protection and dignity often emphasized elsewhere in the Bible.
Paradox #2
Deuteronomy 22:28 can raise doctrinal concerns because it seems to conflict with modern views on consent and justice for victims. This verse's implication about marriage following an assault may seem inconsistent with the Bible's overarching themes of compassion and protection for the vulnerable.
Paradox #3
This verse could be seen as controversial or problematic because it suggests a resolution for a situation that, by today's standards, involves a serious moral and ethical issue. It seems to treat a severe act in a way that does not align with modern views on consent and justice. Critics often point out this apparent contradiction between ancient legal codes and contemporary values.
Paradox #4
The contradiction or conflict could involve moral and ethical concerns rather than strictly scientific ones. The verse's content may clash with modern views on consent and women's rights, which can be seen as inconsistent with contemporary ethical standards.
Paradox #5
The contradiction in Deuteronomy 22:28 could arise from the perceived leniency of the consequence given to a man for his actions, suggesting a lack of justice or support for the victim. This can create conflict with modern views on consent and accountability.