Contradiction with Galatians 3:28
This verse highlights that in Christ there is neither male nor female, suggesting equality that may contradict Numbers 36:8's determination on inheritance based on tribal affiliation, which inherently considers gender and tribal lineage.
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 Matthew 22:30
This verse indicates that in the resurrection people will neither marry nor be given in marriage, suggesting a departure from laws like those in Numbers 36:8 that are concerned with marriage for inheritance and lineage purposes.
Matthew 22:30: But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 16:7
This verse emphasizes that the Lord looks at the heart rather than outward appearance, contrasting with the tribal and familial considerations specified in Numbers 36:8 for inheritance and marriage.
1 Samuel 16:7: But the LORD said unto Samuel, Look not on his countenance, or on the height of his stature; because I have refused him: for [the LORD seeth] not as man seeth; for man looketh on the outward appearance, but the LORD looketh on the heart. [outward...: Heb. eyes]
Contradiction with Acts 10:34-35
This verse asserts that God shows no partiality, but accepts those from every nation who fear Him, which can be seen as contradicting the tribal and nationalistic implications of Numbers 36:8.
Acts 10:34-35: Then Peter opened [his] mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons:
Contradiction with Colossians 3:11
This verse emphasizes unity and equality in Christ, beyond divisions such as race or status, contrasting with the tribal distinctions and specific inheritance rules in Numbers 36:8.
Colossians 3:11: Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, circumcision nor uncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, bond [nor] free: but Christ [is] all, and in all.
Paradox #1
Numbers 36:8 discusses inheritance laws for the Israelites to keep land within their tribe. A historical inconsistency could be seen when comparing this verse with other biblical accounts, like some parts of Joshua, where inheritance rules or practices might not always align perfectly with this directive. Discrepancies in how different tribes handled inheritance or differing interpretations over time could create confusion or perceived conflict.
Paradox #2
The potential contradiction in this verse could stem from its directive that restricts women's choice in marriage to within their own tribal groups. This could be seen as a conflict with modern values of freedom and individual choice in marriage, suggesting a tension between preserving tribal inheritance and personal autonomy.