Contradiction with Exodus 21:2
This verse talks about allowing Hebraic servitude under certain conditions, which might contrast with the protective tone of Deuteronomy 23:15 towards escaping servants.
Exodus 21:2: If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing.
Contradiction with Leviticus 25:44-46
These verses allow for owning foreign slaves permanently, which seems at odds with Deuteronomy 23:15's implication against returning an escaped slave.
Leviticus 25:44-46: Both thy bondmen, and thy bondmaids, which thou shalt have, [shall be] of the heathen that are round about you; of them shall ye buy bondmen and bondmaids.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 7:21
This verse advises those called to the faith while being a servant to not be overly concerned about their status, which might contradict Deuteronomy 23:15's advocacy for a servant's agency in escaping.
1 Corinthians 7:21: Art thou called [being] a servant? care not for it: but if thou mayest be made free, use [it] rather.
Contradiction with Philemon 1:12-16
These verses show Paul sending Onesimus back to Philemon, which appears to counter the direction in Deuteronomy 23:15 against returning an escaped servant.
Philemon 1:12-16: Whom I have sent again: thou therefore receive him, that is, mine own bowels:
Paradox #1
Deuteronomy 23:15 talks about not returning an escaped slave to their master, which could be seen as inconsistent with other parts of the Bible that discuss slavery and the treatment of slaves, such as instructions in the New Testament for slaves to obey their masters. This might appear contradictory in terms of how slavery is addressed in different contexts within the Bible.
Paradox #2
Deuteronomy 23:15 could appear to conflict with other Bible passages that discuss obedience to authority or the return of runaway slaves, such as in the New Testament. This can seem inconsistent because it supports helping runaway slaves gain freedom, which contrasts with passages that stress obedience to masters or authorities. However, differing historical contexts and interpretations might account for this variance.
Paradox #3
One possible contradiction in Deuteronomy 23:15 might arise when it is compared to other ancient laws, such as those of neighboring cultures like Babylon, which had strict rules about returning runaway slaves. While Deuteronomy shows a more lenient approach by not requiring the return of escaped slaves, other cultures might have considered this problematic, as they emphasized the ownership and return of slaves as a legal obligation. This difference highlights conflicting views on slavery and personal freedom in the ancient world.
Paradox #4
This verse might seem to conflict with other biblical texts that emphasize following laws and rules, which can include returning escapees or respecting authorities. It creates a tension between the value of protecting an individual in need and the idea of obeying existing societal structures.