Responding to "The Skeptics Annotated Bible"- Was Haman an Agagite

I came across the website, "The Skeptics Annotated Bible" today. At first, I was thinking, "Oh great, another pathetic attempt by some ignorant atheist trying to discredit the Bible." While I do think many of the claims of "The Skeptics Annotated Bible" are weak or ignorant, it does make some good points to think about from a Christian perspective.

As I searched through the sight, I began to see that the creator of this site studies the Bible more than most Christians do. Sad, but true. Most Christians have a limited knowledge of the Bible due to a lack of effort and or a lack of guidance of God's Holy Spirit. This website actually inspires me to examine the claims against the Bible.

Now, I don't believe that any of the claims will cause me to reject the word of God. But I do think it's good to hear an opposing perspective to strengthen my own.
"Iron sharpens iron, So one man sharpens another."- Proverbs 27:17

Christians are so ready to tell atheists off, but they need to be prepared when doing so.
"but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,"- 1 Peter 3:15

Now, regarding the question regarding Haman being an Agagite

Esther 3:1 tells that Haman was an Agagite:
"After these things did king Ahasuerus promote Haman the son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him, and set his seat above all the princes that were with him."

In 1 Samuel 15:2-3, God (through Samuel) tells Saul to wipe out the Amalekites:
Thus saith the LORD of hosts ... Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

I Samuel 15:7-8 says Saul all the Amalekites..Except Agag, king of the Amalekites.
And Saul smote the Amalekites ... And he took Agag the king of the Amalekites alive, and utterly destroyed all the people with the edge of the sword.

1 Samuel 15:32-33 mentions Samuel killing Agag.
Then said Samuel, Bring ye hither to me Agag the king of the Amalekites. And Agag came unto him delicately. And Agag said, Surely the bitterness of death is past. And Samuel said, As the sword hath made women childless, so shall thy mother be childless among women. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before the LORD in Gilgal.

The Skeptics Annotated Bible implies there is a contradiction. How could Haman be an Agagite, if his people (the Amalekites) were destroyed? A good question.

A couple things to consider?
- Why was Samuel so upset that Saul left Agag and some cattle alive?
- In the book of Esther, why did Haman have such a hatred for the Jews? Why did he want to wipe out the Jews? Did he want to avenge what Saul did to his ancestors?

In 1 Samuel 15: 32-33, Agag mentions that "surely the bitterness of death has past" when being taken to Samuel. This reveals that there has been quite some time between Agag's capture and being taken before Samuel. Would Agag really think that the bitterness of death had past in a matter of a short time?

After some research, I came across an article regarding this topic by By Robert D. Mock MD. Dr. Mock says:
"In the oral traditions of the Jews, the rabbis claim that the Amalekites king, Agag, was treated with royal courtesy and was given the choicest of the concubines of King Saul in a manner befitting a king. Not only was King Agag living in the land of Israel, which that alone was an abomination to the Lord, but the progeny that were conceived by this union of Israelite maidens to the Amalekites king in the Land of Israel became the ancestry of Haman the Agagite and future ‘Amalekites’, all who will genetically retain a hatred toward the chosen people of God. The strongholds of these ‘Amalekite-Israeli’ descendants were raised in the region of Shechem."
(http://www.biblesearchers.com/hebrews/festivals/purimamalekites.shtml)

Samuel was very angry at Saul for letting King Agag live. If Agag really had been captured from the scene of the battle and then directly taken to Samuel, would Samuel really condemn Saul this harshly? There were repercussions for Saul's poor judgement that led to the near genocide of God's chosen people, the Jews.