Contradiction with Deuteronomy 5:19
This verse prohibits theft, which contradicts Judges 21:22 where the Israelites justify taking wives by force.
Deuteronomy 5:19: Neither shalt thou steal.
Contradiction with Exodus 20:17
This verse forbids coveting a neighbor's wife, contradicting the events of Judges 21:22 where men take women without consent.
Exodus 20:17: Thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbour's wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that [is] thy neighbour's.
Contradiction with Matthew 7:12
Jesus teaches to treat others as you want to be treated, contradicting the forced taking of wives in Judges 21:22.
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.
Contradiction with Romans 13:10
This verse states that love does no harm to a neighbor, contradicting the act of forcibly taking wives in Judges 21:22.
Romans 13:10: Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love [is] the fulfilling of the law.
Contradiction with 1 Corinthians 13:4-5
These verses describe love as patient and kind, contradicting the coercive actions condoned in Judges 21:22.
1 Corinthians 13:4-5: Charity suffereth long, [and] is kind; charity envieth not; charity vaunteth not itself, is not puffed up, [vaunteth...: or, is not rash]
Paradox #1
The verse suggests the Israelites allow the Benjaminites to take wives by unconventional means, which raises moral and ethical questions about consent and treatment of women. This seems inconsistent with other biblical teachings that emphasize love, respect, and protection within marriage.
Paradox #2
This verse can be seen as inconsistent with the broader biblical teachings on consent and the treatment of individuals. It describes a situation where actions are justified in a way that seems to conflict with biblical principles of love, respect, and justice, which emphasize treating others with kindness and fairness.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in this context could involve the ethical and moral teachings of the Bible. This verse describes a situation where the Israelites condoned taking women from another tribe as wives by force. This action can be seen as inconsistent with other biblical teachings that promote respect, love, and consent in relationships. Such a narrative may conflict with the broader Biblical principles of justice and treating others with respect.
Paradox #4
This verse could be seen as morally conflicting because it involves justifying an act that could be perceived as non-consensual or unfair in today's understanding of ethics. The context implies taking people without their full agreement, which clashes with contemporary values of individual rights and consent.