I disagree. A paradox must lead us to a dead end.
But we must distinguish between paradoxes and what the greeks called "aporia". Zeno formulated aporias.
A paradox would be the the example of Russel, concerning Fregge's logic of arithmetic. Or in a similar case, the paradox of the "liar".
I've never heard of that distinction before, and, frankly, I'm not convinced that you have identified any meaningful difference (I tend to agree with antibuddha
: a paradox is an apparent contradiction). Are you relying upon someone else, or did you develop that distinction on your own?