(1Samuel 31:4)
“Then Saul said to his armor bearer, ‘Draw your sword and pierce me through with it, otherwise these uncircumcised will come and pierce me through and make sport of me.’ But his armor bearer would not, for he was greatly afraid. So Saul took his sword and fell on it.”
…———…
A critic once wrote to me and claimed that the Bible contradicts itself in regards to the death of king Saul.
So, first, as dedicated detectives, we’re going to conduct an investigation and discover what is written. Second, we will initiate an examination from the investigation. And third, we will produce an analyzation from the examination of the investigation. And finally, we will determine a logical conclusion based on our analysis of the evidence.
Investigation:
The death of Saul is documented in three different books:
1Samuel 31:
1Samuel 31:3 — Saul got wounded by the archers.
1Samuel 31:4 — Saul asked his armor bearer to kill him, but the armor bearer refused. And so Saul chose to fall on his own sword.
1Samuel 31:5 — Saul’s armor bearer saw Saul as being dead and then chose to fall on his own sword in order to die with him.
1Samuel 31:6 — Saul died that day.
1Samuel 31:8-9 — the Philistines saw Saul dead the next day on Mount Gilboa, they cut off his head, and took his weapons.
1Chronicles 10:
1Chronicles 10:3 — Saul got wounded by the archers.
1Chronicles 10:4 — Saul asked his armor bearer to kill him, but the armor bearer refused. And so Saul chose to fall on his own sword.
1Chronicles 10:5 — Saul’s armor bearer saw Saul as being dead and then chose to fall on his own sword in order to die with him.
1Chronicles 10:6 — Saul died that day.
1Chronicles 10:8-9 — the Philistines saw Saul dead the next day on Mount Gilboa, cut off his head, and took his armor.
2Samuel 1:
2Samuel 1:1 — David returned from battle where he had slaughtered a community of Amalekites and he stayed two days in Ziklag.
2Samuel 1:2-8 — on the third day, an Amalekite, with his clothes torn and dust on his head, claimed he happened to be on Mount Gilboa by chance and saw Saul leaning on his spear the day he died.
2Samuel 1:9 — Saul apparently asked the Amalekite to kill him because he was not yet dead.
2Samuel 1:10 — the Amalekite claimed to have killed Saul in mercy, took Saul’s crown and bracelet, and then he traveled the distance required in order to present those items to David.
2Samuel 1:13-16 — David, after interrogating the Amalekite, had him killed because his own words testified against himself that he was guilty of taking the life of the Lord’s anointed.
Examination:
Both 1Samuel 31 and 1Chronicles 10 tell the same story of Saul’s death with the same details. The only detail that differs between those two accounts is that 1Samuel 31:9-10 states that the Philistines took Saul’s weapons, whereas 1Chronicles 10:9-10 states that the Philistines took Saul’s armor. However, weapons and armor are synonymous and they both describe the items belonging to a soldier; therefore, there’s no real discrepancy between these accounts. However, 2Samuel 1 tells the story of Saul’s death with slightly different details which seem to contradict what the other two accounts describe.
Now, as a detective, details are important in order to identify true discrepancies between independent eyewitness accounts. Out of the three accounts, the one that differs came from what an Amalekite claimed. Not only did the Amalekite claim that Saul had fallen on his spear instead of his sword, but he also claimed to have killed Saul himself whereas the other two accounts state that Saul died after falling on his own sword. The other two accounts were likely created due to multiple eyewitnesses from Israelites who fled the scene of the battle after they realized Saul had fallen (1Samuel 31:7; 1Chronicles 10:7). But 2Samuel 1’s account is based on one single Amalekite’s testimony. So, how credible is this man as a witness? Well, first and foremost, he cannot be a credible witness because credible eyewitness testimony must be two or more (Deuteronomy 17:6; 19:15; Matthew 18:16; 2Corinthians 13:1; 1Timothy 5:19; Hebrews 10:28). But also, who were the Amalekites? If he was one of them, it’s important to know who they are.
According to Genesis 36:12,16, the Amalekites descended from Esau and are thus related to the Edomites. The history of relations between the Amalekites and the Israelites is one of perpetual hostility. The Amalekites attacked the Israelites shortly after the Red Sea crossing. The outcome of the battle included a declaration of perpetual war between the Amalekites and the GOD of Israel (Exodus 17:8-16; Deuteronomy 25:17-19). There were several subsequent conflicts (Numbers 14:45; Judges 3:13; 6:3,33; 7:12; 10:12), continuing in the campaigns of both Saul (1Samuel 15:1-9) and David (1Samuel 27:8; 30:16-20). And the final chapter in the historic struggle between Israel and the Amalekites is Mordecai and Esther’s confrontation with Haman, who identified as an “Agagite” — that is, a descendent of Agag, the Amalekite king whom Saul spared even though GOD commanded Saul not to spare him (Esther 3:1; 1Samuel 15:8-9,18-19).
The historical context, therefore, makes it evident that the Amalekites were still enemies to both Saul and David at the time of Saul’s death. And so two curious questions arise:
(1) Why would Saul ask another enemy to kill him if he didn’t want to die at the hands of his enemies?
(2) Why would an Amalekite bring Saul’s crown and bracelet to David if David had just finished slaughtering a huge community of Amalekites?
In the proper historical chronological context, during this time, David and his men joined Achish (a Philistine) in battle against Saul (only because Saul was trying to murder David and so he placed himself in Philistine territory). However, while David and his men were out with Achish, the place where David stayed for over a year (Ziklag) was overrun, plundered, and burned by marauding Amalekites (1Samuel 30:1-2). In fact, one of the reasons GOD commanded Saul to completely destroy the Amalekites in 1Samuel 15:1-9 is because they were guerrilla terrorists. They were hyenas. They lived by attacking other nations and carrying off their wealth and their families. They continued to raid Israelite camps at every opportunity. GOD knew that the Israelites could never live peacefully in the Promised Land as long as the Amalekites existed. He also knew that their corrupt, idolatrous religious practices threatened Israel’s relationship with Him.
Analysis:
A logical conclusion is that the Amalekite was likely a survivor who fled from David’s campaign against the Amalekites (1Samuel 30:17). Where did he go when he escaped being slaughtered by David and his men? Well, I believe he told the truth when he said, “I have escaped from the camp of Israel” (2Samuel 1:3). Interesting. Why was he there? He was most likely there to scavenge from the victims of the war between Israel and the Philistines. Like vultures, the Amalekites were opportunists, solely focused on survival. And so I believe the Amalekite told the truth when he said that by chance he happened to be on Mount Gilboa and witnessed Saul’s death (2Samuel 1:6). This much is evident because he presented David with Saul’s crown and bracelet. This means that he had been there when Saul died, had been able to take the crown and bracelet, and flee the scene before the Philistines returned to the body of Saul in order to take his weapons and armor. If Saul’s crown had been on Saul’s head (which the Philistines cut off), they would have taken that crown as well. But 1Samuel 31 and 1Chronicles 10 only state that the Philistines took Saul’s weapons and armor. So, the evidence most certainly does put this Amalekite at the scene of the crime when Saul had died. But did he actually kill Saul as he claimed or was he only there to witness Saul’s death and he only claimed to kill Saul? But why would anyone desire to claim to kill Saul if that person didn’t actually do it? Well, according to the Amalekite, he killed Saul as an act of mercy. And truly, that would be the only justifiable reason for him taking Saul’s crown and bracelet. According to him, he only took Saul’s crown and bracelet so that he could give them to David.
What else do we know? Well, we know that Saul asked his armor bearer to kill him, not this Amalekite. And so this man merely put himself in the armor bearer’s place in the story. This is also evident because he doesn’t even mention the armor bearer in his account. Why not? Because he took the place of the armor bearer in the story. But we know from the other two accounts that the armor bearer didn’t kill himself until after he saw Saul die. And so, at what point would Saul — while impaled on his sword (not spear) —have asked the Amalekite to kill him? And if the armor bearer didn’t kill himself until after Saul’s death, then he would have been alive when Saul supposedly asked the Amalekite to kill him. But would the armor bearer have allowed an Amalekite to kill Saul, who was the Lord’s anointed? No— I don’t believe so.
Further, because the Amalekite had nowhere to go due to the battles all around him, it is evident he put on a performance of mourning by ripping his clothes and pouring ashes over his head (2Samuel 1:2). Why? What would have been this man’s motive? Well, it seems that he planned to get on David’s good side by presenting him with Saul’s crown and bracelet. But why would he want to get on David’s good side? Not only did David just slaughter a community of Amalekites, but David was currently on the good side of the Philistines, who just killed Saul (1Samuel 27:6). And so if you were this man, you would likely believe that David and the Philistines were now uniting forces, placing David on the winning side and thereby making you on the losing side. In order to attain safety, security, comfort, and convenience in that ancient time period, one would need to be under protection from a powerful kingdom. This Amalekite needed to get on David’s good side for the sake of his survival. However, not only did he lie to David, sharing wrong details regarding Saul’s death (spear/sword; 2Samuel 1:6), but he claimed that Saul asked him to kill him even though it is highly unlikely that Saul would have asked an Amalekite to kill him. And even if Saul did, in 2Samuel 1:13, this man claimed to be a [גֵּ֥ר] [1616] gêr (gare), which is a term referring to a sojourner who resides in the land of Israel who would have been subject to Israel’s laws (Leviticus 19:33-34; 24:22). Therefore, like Saul’s armor bearer (1Samuel 31:4-5) and David (1Samuel 24:6-7), this man should have known not to kill the Lord’s anointed. And so at this point, the man is either a liar and did not kill Saul or he deliberately disregarded and disobeyed the fact that he was not to kill the Lord’s anointed. Either way, this man is now guilty according to his own words.
Finally, in an ironic conclusion which showcases the recurring theme of the great reversal seen throughout the entire Bible, this Amalekite who managed to escape both Saul and David’s war campaigns against the Amalekites ended up returning to David. This man, believing he would find favor and be rewarded, was rewarded only with death, which was what GOD commanded Saul to do to the Amalekites in the first place. And this is why even if this Amalekite told the truth of how he discovered Saul still alive and then he killed him (perhaps with his spear), it still would have been an ironic great reversal scenario where Saul had been commanded to destroy the Amalekites, but because he didn’t, an Amalekite ended up killing him. However, due to the fact that being by himself he is not a credible witness, the fact that his account of the story highlighted many discrepancies of details, and the fact that proper historical chronological context showcases this man as an enemy, it is evident that this Amalekite lied in order to gain favor in David’s eyes and receive a reward — even if that reward was covering from the kingdom to ensure his safety. But GOD used this man’s own wicked desires and lies to lead him to the judgment GOD had placed upon him in 1Samuel 15:1-9. And this only showcases the Truth of GOD’s Word as it is written in Isaiah 55:10-11: “For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven, and do not return there without watering the earth and making it bear and sprout, and furnishing seed to the sower and bread to the eater; so will My word be which goes forth from My mouth; it will not return to Me empty, without accomplishing what I desire, and without succeeding in the matter for which I sent it.” [See also, Isaiah 45:23; 46:10]
GOD’s Word will not return void. Saul failed to completely destroy the Amalekites due to his lack of faithful obedience. David failed to destroy them all, but it was not due to a lack of his faithful obedience; many of them simply escaped while David was gathering what was stolen from him. But GOD Himself brought this Amalekite to David as powerful imagery, foreshadowing that not only will David become king — remember, he received Saul’s crown (Saul’s kingdom would be torn from him and given to David – 1Samuel 15:27-28; 24:4,11), but also that GOD will deliver Israel’s enemies into David’s hands like GOD did with this Amalekite (1Samuel 20:16; 24:4; 2Samuel 7:1).
In conclusion, the Amalekite’s account of Saul’s death in 2Samuel 1 is an apparent contradiction because David believed his story at the time; however, it’s not an actual contradiction because two other accounts from multiple eyewitnesses provide us with the Truth, which exposes the lies of the Amalekite. It is not a coincidence that GOD said there must be two or more witnesses and then the Bible provides two different accounts of the Truth in order to expose the one false account by the Amalekite. For this story, the devil is in the details. Discrepancy of details and proper historical chronological context reveals that the Amalekite lied and by his own words he was condemned to death. And so this story of David judging the Amalekite according to his own words mirrors the parable Jesus told about the fruitfulness of stewardship when the master said to the servant in Luke 19:22, “By your own words I will judge you.” And it is for this reason Jesus said in Matthew 12:36-37, “But I tell you that every careless word that people speak, they shall give an accounting for it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”
Listen, you can fool people, but you can’t fool GOD. The Lord will bring every act to judgment. There is nothing concealed that will not be revealed, or hidden that will not be known. Whatever you have said in the dark will be heard in the light, and what you have whispered in the inner rooms will be proclaimed upon the housetops. [Ecclesiastes 12:14; Jeremiah 23:23-24; Daniel 2:22; Matthew 10:26; Luke 12:2-3]
Wicked people go out of their way to do evil deeds when they could put that effort into living righteously. Likewise, critics go out of their way to read GOD’s Word with evil intent when they could put that effort into learning and understanding how to live righteously. Instead of knowing GOD’s Word and obeying GOD’s Word in order to please the King (Luke 6:46-49; John 13:17; 14:15,21; Romans 2:13; James 1:22-25; 4:17; 1John 2:3), some people — like the Amalekite — attempt to please the king with worthless offerings while living in disobedience. And just as the Amalekite presented a worthless offering to king David out from his disobedience, Saul had presented a worthless offering to the true King (the Lord) out from his disobedience (1Samuel 15:20-21). And in 1Samuel 15:22-23, Samuel said to Saul, “Has the Lord as much delight in burnt offerings and sacrifices as in obeying the voice of the Lord? Behold, to obey is better than sacrifice, and to heed than the fat of rams. For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and insubordination is as iniquity and idolatry. Because you have rejected the word of the Lord, He has also rejected you from being king.”
The critics and crooks who believe themselves to be clever will be condemned by their own words.
1Corinthians 1:18-19 says, “For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. For it is written, ‘I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and the cleverness of the clever I will set aside.’
And so it is written in Romans 3:4, “Let God be found true, though every man be found a liar.”
Where there are perceived problems and apparent contradictions, there are always Scriptural solutions. The Bible is the inspired Word of GOD and is without error, since GOD cannot err (Numbers 23:19; 1Samuel 15:29; Isaiah 40:8; 55:11; John 17:17; Hebrews 6:18; Titus 1:2). There is a purpose to every passage you read. There is always depth beyond the surface.
Reflection:
What did the depth beyond the surface of this apparent contradiction help you to understand?