Contradiction with Hosea 13:11
This verse states that God gave the Israelites a king in anger, suggesting that the act was disfavored, which contrasts with 1 Samuel 12:13 where Samuel presents the king as chosen by the people.
Hosea 13:11: I gave thee a king in mine anger, and took [him] away in my wrath.
Contradiction with Deuteronomy 17:14-15
This passage gives guidelines for selecting a king, which implies divine approval for monarchy, contrasting with the negative undertone in 1 Samuel 12:13 where having a king is portrayed as a concession.
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 moral conflict in this verse may arise from the idea of having a king ruling over the people. Previously, God was seen as the sole king and ruler of Israel, and by anointing a human king, it suggests a shift away from direct divine rule to human governance. This could be seen as a contradiction to God's earlier desire for His people not to have a human king, emphasizing a conflict between divine intention and human actions.