Contradiction with Deuteronomy 21:15-17
This verse contradicts Numbers 27:8 by prioritizing the rights of the firstborn son even if he is from an unloved wife, whereas Numbers 27:8 allows inheritance rights for daughters if there are no sons.
Deuteronomy 21:15-17: If a man have two wives, one beloved, and another hated, and they have born him children, [both] the beloved and the hated; and [if] the firstborn son be hers that was hated:
Contradiction with 1 Chronicles 5:1-2
This verse emphasizes the birthright of Reuben being given away because of his transgression, highlighting male lineage and primogeniture, which contrasts with Numbers 27:8 allowing daughters to inherit if no sons exist.
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.
Contradiction with Numbers 36:6-9
This passage contradicts Numbers 27:8 by setting conditions on female inheritance that they must marry within their father’s tribe to retain their inheritance, whereas Numbers 27:8 does not specify this condition initially.
Numbers 36:6-9: 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]
Paradox #1
Numbers 27:8 states that if a man dies without having a son, his property should pass to his daughter. The potential contradiction here could be the prioritization of sons over daughters for inheritance, suggesting a gender inequality. This might conflict with modern views on gender equality, as it assumes men are the default heirs unless there are none available.