Contradiction with Joshua 17:12-13
These verses state that the Canaanites were not driven out completely, but eventually were put to tribute, implying partial control, similar to Judges 1:29.
Joshua 17:12-13: Yet the children of Manasseh could not drive out [the inhabitants of] those cities; but the Canaanites would dwell in that land.
Contradiction with Judges 1:21
Despite the failure to drive out inhabitants, this verse shows inconsistency as it speaks about the tribe of Benjamin not driving out the Jebusites, indicating similar unsuccessful attempts by other tribes.
Judges 1:21: And the children of Benjamin did not drive out the Jebusites that inhabited Jerusalem; but the Jebusites dwell with the children of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day.
Contradiction with Judges 16:21
This illustrates that Israelites' inability to fully conquer adversaries led to their subjugation, not just cohabitation, which underlines failure to completely overcome opposition, as in Judges 1:29.
Judges 16:21: But the Philistines took him, and put out his eyes, and brought him down to Gaza, and bound him with fetters of brass; and he did grind in the prison house. [put out: Heb. bored out]
Contradiction with 1 Samuel 15:9
Contradicts the destruction mandate of enemy possessions or people by showing disobedience in not fully carrying out God’s command, reflecting failure or partial achievement as seen in Judges 1:29.
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]
Paradox #1
The historical inconsistency regarding Judges 1:29 could be seen when compared to Joshua 21:25. In Judges, it mentions that the Israelites did not drive out the C