Contradiction with Exodus 21:12
This verse states that someone who strikes a person and kills them shall be put to death, whereas 1 Samuel 26:9 suggests sparing Saul's life and not causing death.
Exodus 21:12: He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death.
Contradiction with Numbers 35:17
This verse requires murderers to be put to death, in contrast to 1 Samuel 26:9, where David prevents the killing of Saul.
Numbers 35:17: And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he [is] a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death. [with...: Heb. with a stone of the hand]
Contradiction with Leviticus 24:17
It prescribes the death penalty for any person who kills a human being, unlike 1 Samuel 26:9 which discourages killing Saul.
Leviticus 24:17: And he that killeth any man shall surely be put to death. [killeth...: Heb. smiteth the life of a man]
Contradiction with Matthew 5:38-39
These verses advocate for non-retaliation and turning the other cheek, while 1 Samuel 26:9 suggests restraint, but for the reason of not harming God's anointed.
Matthew 5:38-39: Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth:
Contradiction with Genesis 9:6
It demands that anyone who sheds human blood should have their blood shed, contradictory to David’s decision in 1 Samuel 26:9 to spare Saul’s life.
Genesis 9:6: Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.
Paradox #1
1 Samuel 26:9 might appear to conflict with earlier passages where God commands or allows violence in certain situations. David refuses to harm Saul, indicating an understanding that God's anointed should not be harmed. This raises questions about when it is acceptable to engage in violence and the consistency of God's commands concerning violence.
Paradox #2
In 1 Samuel 26:9, David refuses to kill King Saul because he sees Saul as the Lord's anointed. This is seen as contradictory because, earlier in 1 Samuel 24, David had a similar chance to kill Saul and refrained for the same reason, highlighting a repeated situation with the same moral lesson. There might be an inconsistency in the narrative about how often David is presented with these moral tests and responds in the same way.
Paradox #3
The contradiction in that verse could be seen in the context of conflicting messages about violence and authority. On one hand, the Bible promotes the idea of respecting authority and not harming those in power. On the other hand, there are numerous instances where violence is depicted positively or as a necessary act. This inconsistency can create confusion about when it is morally acceptable to take a stand against authority or to commit acts of violence.