Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:21
Whereas 1 Samuel 15:20 claims Saul obeyed God completely, this verse reveals Saul admitting to sparing some livestock, contradicting his claim of full obedience.**
1 Samuel 15:21: But the people took of the spoil, sheep and oxen, the chief of the things which should have been utterly destroyed, to sacrifice unto the LORD thy God in Gilgal.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:22
This verse emphasizes that obedience is better than sacrifice, contradicting Saul's belief that he obeyed despite bringing sacrifices from the Amalekites.**
1 Samuel 15:22: And Samuel said, Hath the LORD [as great] delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices, as in obeying the voice of the LORD? Behold, to obey [is] better than sacrifice, [and] to hearken than the fat of rams.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:9
This verse reports Saul sparing King Agag and the best livestock, contradicting his claim in 1 Samuel 15:20 of complete obedience.**
1 Samuel 15:9: But Saul and the people spared Agag, and the best of the sheep, and of the oxen, and of the fatlings, and the lambs, and all [that was] good, and would not utterly destroy them: but every thing [that was] vile and refuse, that they destroyed utterly. [fatlings: or, second sort]
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 13:13-14
Here, Saul is told his kingdom will not last due to disobedience, contradicting his self-assessment in 1 Samuel 15:20.**
1 Samuel 13:13-14: And Samuel said to Saul, Thou hast done foolishly: thou hast not kept the commandment of the LORD thy God, which he commanded thee: for now would the LORD have established thy kingdom upon Israel for ever.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:23
This verse equates rebellion and stubbornness with witchcraft and idolatry, directly challenging Saul’s claim of complete obedience.**
1 Samuel 15:23: For rebellion [is as] the sin of witchcraft, and stubbornness [is as] iniquity and idolatry. Because thou hast rejected the word of the LORD, he hath also rejected thee from [being] king. [witchcraft: Heb. divination]
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 28:18
The verse states Saul did not obey the Lord's commands fully, contradicting his claim in 1 Samuel 15:20.**
1 Samuel 28:18: Because thou obeyedst not the voice of the LORD, nor executedst his fierce wrath upon Amalek, therefore hath the LORD done this thing unto thee this day.
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 16:14
The departure of the Spirit of the Lord from Saul due to disobedience, contradicting his claim of obedience in 1 Samuel 15:20.**
1 Samuel 16:14: But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD troubled him. [troubled: or, terrified]
Paradox #1
1 Samuel 15:20 could present a doctrinal conflict with earlier commands given by God to fully destroy the Amalekites and all they possess. In this verse, Saul claims to have followed God’s instructions, but he spared King Agag and the best of the livestock. This shows inconsistency between what Saul believes he did and the total destruction God commanded. This raises questions about obedience and understanding God's commands.
Paradox #2
In 1 Samuel 15:20, Saul claims he obeyed God's command to destroy the Amalekites, but earlier in the chapter, it's clear he did not fully follow the instructions given by God, since he spared King Agag and some of the best livestock. This creates a contradiction between Saul's claim of obedience and his actual actions.
Paradox #3
1 Samuel 15:20 can present a moral conflict because it involves a character claiming obedience to God's command while also sparing what was meant to be destroyed. The inconsistency arises from trying to justify disobedience by claiming partial adherence to God's directives. This reflects a broader moral tension between following divine instructions fully versus making personal judgments that seem contradictory to those instructions.
Paradox #4
In the verse, Saul claims he has followed God's instructions, even though earlier verses (1 Samuel 15:9) reveal he did not completely obey. This contradiction between Saul's claim and his actions creates an inconsistency in the narrative.