Contradiction with Deuteronomy 21:17
This verse mandates that the inheritance for the firstborn should be a double portion, emphasizing male inheritance contrary to allowing daughters to inherit as in Numbers 27:7.
Deuteronomy 21:17: But he shall acknowledge the son of the hated [for] the firstborn, by giving him a double portion of all that he hath: for he [is] the beginning of his strength; the right of the firstborn [is] his. [that...: Heb. that is found with him]
Contradiction with Numbers 36:6-7
This verse restricts daughters to marry within their tribe to keep the inheritance, complicating the freedom of female inheritance established in Numbers 27:7.
Numbers 36:6-7: This [is] the thing which the LORD doth command concerning the daughters of Zelophehad, saying, Let them marry to whom they think best; only to the family of the tribe of their father shall they marry. [marry: Heb. be wives]
Contradiction with Leviticus 25:46
This verse implies perpetual male possession of land, contrasting with Numbers 27:7 which allows inheritance to pass to daughters.
Leviticus 25:46: And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit [them for] a possession; they shall be your bondmen for ever: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. [they...: Heb. ye shall serve yourselves with them]
Contradiction with 1 Chronicles 5:1-2
This passage honors the right of the firstborn son, who typically receives a greater inheritance, contrasting with the inclusive inheritance rights for daughters in Numbers 27:7.
1 Chronicles 5:1-2: Now the sons of Reuben the firstborn of Israel, (for he [was] the firstborn; but, forasmuch as he defiled his father's bed, his birthright was given unto the sons of Joseph the son of Israel: and the genealogy is not to be reckoned after the birthright.
Paradox #1
Numbers 27:7 involves granting inheritance rights to daughters, which represents a shift from traditional patriarchal norms in biblical times where inheritance was typically passed through males. The contradiction or inconsistency here could be seen in how this change challenges previous gender roles and laws that prioritized men, indicating a conflict between established cultural practices and emerging norms of gender equality.