Did he or didn't he?

[Athetotheist]

And when Saul enquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her.
(1 Samuel 28:6-7)

So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it; and enquired not of the Lord
(1Chronicles 10:13-14)

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

[Athetotheist]

...The chronicler accuses Saul of not seeking an answer from Jehovah, and the text of Samuel clearly refutes that accusation.

Sorry, I don't think that is true. Telling what someone did earlier doesn't mean that the person did so in the end also.

But that's just it. The chronicler doesn't tell us that Saul inquired of Jehovah earlier. He states that Saul didn't inquire of Jehovah when Samuel tells us that Saul did. It's the word of the chronicler against the word of the author of Samuel. They don't line up.

[RBD]

And when Saul enquired of the Lord[/u], the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets. Then said Saul unto his servants, Seek me a woman that hath a familiar spirit, that I may go to her, and enquire of her.
(1 Samuel 28:6-7)

So Saul died for his transgression which he committed against the Lord, even against the word of the Lord, which he kept not, and also for asking counsel of one that had a familiar spirit, to enquire of it; and enquired not of the Lord
(1Chronicles 10:13-14)

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

Context, of course. If some people would take time to search for context, rather than only seek to find fault in words, then the Bible would show them the answer themselves:

Mar 12:13
And they send unto him certain of the Pharisees and of the Herodians, to catch him in his words.

Anyone ever heard this before? "Did he or didn't he?" "Well, yes and no. He did and he didn't."

1Sa 28:6
And when Saul enquired of the LORD, the LORD answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.

1Ch 10:14
And Saul enquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse.

Grammatically the words of course don't match, but they certainly do doctrinally. The recorded words are not the same, because the records are different context: Saul did enquire in words, but the Lord's judgment says no.

And here is the context:

Eze 20:31
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be enquired of by you.

Did they enquire, or didn't they? Even if they did, they didn't, not without repentance from the heart.

2Ti 2:22
Follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Mar 7:6
He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

Saul was a king hypocrite unto his death, and when he gave lip service enquiring of the Lord, he went straight to the witches, that he had outlawed before.

Saul did enquire of the Lord, and he didn't. His time of inquiry was with the witch.

[RBD]

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

Gen 38:9
And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother. And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

Did Onan lay with her, or didn't? He did and he didn't, and the Lord slew him for it.

1Ch 10:14
And Saul enquired not of the LORD: therefore he slew him, and turned the kingdom unto David the son of Jesse.

Did Saul enquire of the Lord? He did, and he didn't, and the Lord slew him for it.

Onan defrauded his brother's wife and defiled her chaste name. Saul defrauded the Lord and defiled His holy Name.

[RBD]

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

He did, and he didn't:

Eze 20:31
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be enquired of by you.

Isa 1:13
Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.

Isa 66:3
He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

Isa 29:13
Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Lev 26:19
And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass:


Did they enquire of the Lord God? Assemble in His name? Sacrifice to Him? Honor and fear and pray to Him? Yes and no. In words, yes. In deed and in truth, no.

James 2:15
If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

1 John 3:17
But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

Do they love God and men? Yes or no? Yes in word, but not in deed and in truth.

Who will now say, that someone speaking words of blessing to the sick, and the poor, and the injured, but do nothing to help them, loved them? Let the record show they said loving words, but who will say they loved them?

Luk 10:31
And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.

But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.

Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

Weren't the first two, also neighbors of the injured? Yes or no? Physically, yes. In deed and truth, no. They were neighbors of, but they were not neighbors to the injured in need.

If someone asks in a whisper, so that no one hears, did they ask? Yes and no. If someone knocks lightly, so that no one hears, did they knock? Yes and no. If someone shines a light under a covered table, did they shine their light? Yes and no. If an employee does a lousy job, did he do the job? Yes and no. The employee did a job, but the Boss says no, he did not do the job. If someone testifies on the stand by telling half-truths and lies, did he tell the truth? The witness says yes, the judge says no.

Did Saul enquire of the LORD? The record in 1 Sam 20 says he did, and the Lord in 1 Chron 13 says he did not.

In this one apparent contradiction of words, is the whole theology of the Bible:

Mat 15:8
This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

Jas 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

And when Saul enquired of the Lord[/u], the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.

Sure, Saul 'enquired' of the Lord with his lips, but certainly not with faith in the Lord. In the Bible (if not with some people), if it's not with the heart, then it's nothing to the Lord. And if the Lord says it's nothing, then it didn't happen at all...

A Bible contradiction would be, that Saul enquired of the Lord, and the Lord heard Him, and then elsewhere that Saul enquired not of the Lord. Otherwise, in the Bible (if not with some people), there is no contradiction when people do things in the name of the Lord, but the Lord says they did not:

Mat 7:22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

[RBD]

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

He did, and he didn't:

Eze 20:31
For when ye offer your gifts, when ye make your sons to pass through the fire, ye pollute yourselves with all your idols, even unto this day: and shall I be enquired of by you, O house of Israel? As I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will not be enquired of by you.

Isa 1:13
Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination unto me; the new moons and sabbaths, the calling of assemblies, I cannot away with; it is iniquity, even the solemn meeting.

Isa 66:3
He that killeth an ox is as if he slew a man; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck; he that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's blood; he that burneth incense, as if he blessed an idol. Yea, they have chosen their own ways, and their soul delighteth in their abominations.

Isa 29:13
Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men:

Lev 26:19
And I will break the pride of your power; and I will make your heaven as iron, and your earth as brass:


Did they enquire of the Lord God? Assemble in His name? Sacrifice to Him? Honor and fear and pray to Him? Yes and no. In words, yes. In deed and in truth, no.

James 2:15
If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit?

1 John 3:17
But whoso hath this world's good, and seeth his brother have need, and shutteth up his bowels of compassion from him, how dwelleth the love of God in him?

Do they love God and men? Yes or no? Yes in word, but not in deed and in truth.

Who will now say, that someone speaking words of blessing to the sick, and the poor, and the injured, but do nothing to help them, loved them? Let the record show they said loving words, but who will say they loved them?

Luk 10:31
And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.

But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him.

Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

Weren't the first two, also neighbors of the injured? Yes or no? Physically, yes. In deed and truth, no. They were neighbors of, but they were not neighbors to the injured in need.

[RBD]

How exactly are these to be reconciled?

He did, and he didn't:

If someone asks in a whisper, so that no one hears, did they ask? Yes and no. If someone knocks lightly, so that no one hears, did they knock? Yes and no. If someone shines a light under a covered table, did they shine their light? Yes and no. If an employee does a lousy job, did he do the job? Yes and no. The employee did a job, but the Boss says no, he did not do the job. If someone testifies on the stand by telling half-truths and lies, did he tell the truth? The witness says yes, the judge says no.

Did Saul enquire of the LORD? The record in 1 Sam 20 says he did, and the Lord in 1 Chron 13 says he did not.

In this one apparent contradiction of words, is the whole theology of the Bible:

Mat 15:8
This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

Jas 2:20
But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?

And when Saul enquired of the Lord[/u], the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim, nor by prophets.

Sure, Saul 'enquired' of the Lord with his lips, but certainly not with faith in the Lord. In the Bible (if not with some people), if it's not with the heart, then it's nothing to the Lord. And if the Lord says it's nothing, then it didn't happen at all...

A Bible contradiction would be, that Saul enquired of the Lord, and the Lord heard Him, and then elsewhere that Saul enquired not of the Lord. Otherwise, in the Bible (if not with some people), there is no contradiction when people do things in the name of the Lord, but the Lord says they did not:

Mat 7:22
Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.

They knew the Lord, and they didn't.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #12]

Grammatically the words of course don't match, but they certainly do doctrinally.

Elsewhere you have stated the following, with my bolding added here:

The problem is when people do not read the Bible with the same objective and grammatical integrity, as they do other books of record.

Bible grammatical and historical inerrancy compels me to believe in other gods and angels, than that of the Bible God and His holy angels.

It's a statement of unbelief with mockery, not literary analysis and grammatical fact.

The science of analytics, including grammatical analysis, is anathema to inconsistent ideology.

You place a high emphasis on the Bible's grammatical inerrancy until it fails.

1 Sam 28 is the one and only time in Saul's kingship, is it recorded that he 'enquired' if the LORD, at the very last hour of his own defeat, brought only by years of rebellion against the LORD.

It matters not if Saul has never enquired before this. You yourself concede that he enquires on this occasion, though you presume to assign an insincere motive to him which the record does not support.

The giveaway is that not getting an answer----by dreams, by urim or by prophets----when he enquires is why he goes to the woman at Endor.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #13]

A Bible contradiction would be, that Saul enquired of the Lord, and the Lord heard Him, and then elsewhere that Saul enquired not of the Lord. Otherwise, in the Bible (if not with some people), there is no contradiction when people do things in the name of the Lord, but the Lord says they did not

The contradiction is that it doesn't say, "When Saul enquired of the Lord, the Lord answered him not, neither by dreams nor by urim nor by prophets because Saul asked insincerely", and that it doesn't say, "Saul died for asking of a familiar spirit and did not ask sincerely of the Lord....". The text----the record----does not state this, so it cannot be invoked as harmonization.


Samuel says that Saul enquired. The chronicler says that he did not.

[Athetotheist]

[Replying to RBD in post #16]

Earlier I posted several exerpts from posts of yours. Here's another from post #270 in this exchange's original thread
viewtopic.php?t=42191

with my bolding again:

"I appreciate the compliment, but the challenge is strictly about any grammatical contradiction in the Bible, where any words are in error, or contradict one another. That would prove Bible errancy"

[RBD]

[Replying to RBD in post #12]

Grammatically the words of course don't match, but they certainly do doctrinally.

Elsewhere you have stated the following, with my bolding added here:

The problem is when people do not read the Bible with the same objective and grammatical integrity, as they do other books of record.

Good job. Waited to see if you were paying attention. You are of course correct, because my standard as written is incorrect. You were simply complying with my own faulty standard, and so the fault is mine not yours.

I, of course, should have included the standard qualifier of context. Any book can contain 'grammatical contradiction', when taken out of context.

Jhn 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son,

1Jo 2:15
Love not the world,

How can God, who so loves the world, command His people not to love the world? Grammatical contradiction without context.

Jhn 3:16
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

1Jo 2:15
Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world.

God so loves the people in the world, as all men ought, but not the evil things that men do, that no man should love.

And so, the different context of the separate statements, make for grammatical inconsistency, due to doctrinal consistency. The first is a record of what Saul did. The latter is a record of what God judged it: You did physically, but you did not spiritually. Saul's heart was with the witch, with whom he spent the most time enquiring.

The doctrinal consistency of the whole Bible is a rebuke to any person that honors with the lips, while despising with the heart. With God and men, it's called outward hypocrisy.

Luk 16:15
And he said unto them, Ye are they which justify yourselves before men; but God knoweth your hearts: for that which is highly esteemed among men is abomination in the sight of God.

Isa 1:15
And when ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you: yea, when ye make many prayers, I will not hear: your hands are full of blood.

You place a high emphasis on the Bible's grammatical inerrancy until it fails.

Until my own faulty standard fails, which is not corrected by your example.

The problem is when people do not read the Bible with the same objective and grammatical integrity, as they do other books of record.

The problem is when people do not read the Bible with the same objective grammatical and contextual integrity, as they do other books of record.

A case study is of a woman raped by a man, whose eyes were covered by a rag during the act, so that she could not see. But when he fled, she took of the rag and saw him before he was out of sight.

The defense charges her with false testimony, because in her initial statemen to police, she said that she did not see him. But the record was that she did not see him, while he was raping her...She did not, and she did.

He did, and he did not. This is a lesson any disobedient child must understand, in order to grow up: "I said I'm sorry" "Your actions say you're not."

1 Sam 28 is the one and only time in Saul's kingship, is it recorded that he 'enquired' if the LORD, at the very last hour of his own defeat, brought only by years of rebellion against the LORD.

It matters not if Saul has never enquired before this. You yourself concede that he enquires on this occasion, though you presume to assign an insincere motive to him which the record does not support.

You have no clue of any Bible record, that dismisses your efforts to find fault. Which is clear by only focusing on the words in the Book, not the teaching of the Book. Which of course is many times a blessing to those who seek the teaching, when finding fault with the words, leads to the doctrinal answer of the Book. As well as a correction of the proper standard of consistency vs contradiction in the Book itself.

Any Book's integrity is proven by objective grammatical and contextual consistency.

The giveaway is that not getting an answer----by dreams, by urim or by prophets----when he enquires is why he goes to the woman at Endor.

The giveaway is that not getting an answer----by dreams, by urim or by prophets----he did not enquire from the heart when he enquires, and is why he goes to the woman at Endor with his heart, who does answer him.

If Saul had been playing a game with the witch, as he did with the LORD, neither would she have answered him and risked death in a snare.

1Sa 28:9
And the woman said unto him, Behold, thou knowest what Saul hath done, how he hath cut off those that have familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the land: wherefore then layest thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die? And Saul sware to her by the LORD, saying, As the LORD liveth, there shall no punishment happen to thee for this thing.

Here is where Saul's evil heart was with the witch, not with the LORD.