Contradiction with Matthew 5:31-32
These verses suggest that divorce, unlike the stipulation in Leviticus concerning a priest's daughter returning to her father's house after divorce, involves issues of adultery and complicates her return to her former household.
Matthew 5:31-32: It hath been said, Whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement:
Contradiction with Galatians 3:28
This verse emphasizes equality among believers, which contrasts with the specific regulations in Leviticus 22:13 regarding gender and familial status.
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 1 Corinthians 7:10-11
This passage advises a wife not to separate from her husband and to remain unmarried or reconciled, opposing the notion of a priest’s daughter returning to her father's home after widowhood or divorce as seen in Leviticus 22:13.
1 Corinthians 7:10-11: And unto the married I command, [yet] not I, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from [her] husband:
Paradox #1
Leviticus 22:13 might seem to conflict with other biblical teachings about support for widows and their independence, since other parts of the Bible stress caring for widows without necessarily directing them back to their father's home. This could appear inconsistent with broader biblical themes of community support and the evolving roles of women in society.
Paradox #2
Leviticus 22:13 might seem to contradict the idea of equality, as it outlines specific conditions under which a divorced or widowed woman can return to her father's household and eat of his food offerings. This might conflict with New Testament teachings emphasizing equality and inclusiveness. However, it's important to consider historical context when interpreting these verses.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in Leviticus 22:13 might be seen in how it treats women who are divorced or widowed. The verse stipulates conditions on who can eat certain sacred offerings, which could be perceived as unfairly restrictive or unequal treatment of women in those circumstances compared to others. It reflects a societal structure and religious practice that might not align with modern views on gender equality.