Contradiction with 1 Samuel 8:7
This verse states that the Israelites rejected God as their king, asking for a human king instead, contradicting the divine anointing of Saul as king in 1 Samuel 10:1.
1 Samuel 8:7: And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.
Contradiction with Hosea 13:11
God expresses regret in giving a king in His anger, which contradicts the positive ceremonial anointing of Saul as king in 1 Samuel 10:1.
Hosea 13:11: I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took [him] away in my wrath.
Contradiction with Judges 8:23
Gideon refuses kingship, stating the Lord should rule over Israel, which contradicts the acceptance of human monarchy indicated in 1 Samuel 10:1.
Judges 8:23: And Gideon said unto them, I will not rule over you, neither shall my son rule over you: the LORD shall rule over you.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 12:19
The people acknowledge sin in asking for a king, contradicting the divine approval shown by Samuel’s anointing of Saul in 1 Samuel 10:1.
1 Samuel 12:19: And all the people said unto Samuel, Pray for thy servants unto the LORD thy God, that we die not: for we have added unto all our sins [this] evil, to ask us a king.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 17:14-15
God anticipates and permits setting a king over Israel but with conditions, which contradicts the unilateral anointing in 1 Samuel 10:1 without reference to these conditions.
Deuteronomy 17:14-15: When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein, and shalt say, I will set a king over me, like as all the nations that [are] about me;
Paradox #1
The contradiction or conflict in 1 Samuel 10:1 might arise from the concept of divine right and human leadership. On one hand, the anointing by God suggests that God chooses and endorses a leader specifically. On the other hand, it raises questions about free will and the role of human selection in governance, as people may have different perspectives or choices for leadership that conflict with what is presented as divinely chosen. This tension between divine authority and human agency can be seen as a moral inconsistency.