If a supposed contradiction can be reconciled, then it is not a contradiction. Some reject any effort at reconciliation, because it disrupts their agenda of claiming that “the bible contradicts itself.”
...I absolutely do not reject reconciliation, quite the contrary, I seek it avidly in the New Testament...yet that does not blind me to any contradictions or lack of independent confirmations...for instance, the Lucan and Matthean lineages for Jesus are completely at odds, and I’m not aware, though I could be wrong, that Paul references himself as Saul of Tarsus, as do the Lucan Acts of the Apostles, or in his corpus of epistles describes his event on the road to Damascus...if I am wrong about stuff like that I would like to be corrected, so please let me know...
The lineages can be reconciled with one being Joseph’s side and one being Mary’s. Both are from the line of David, and that was the point. So, it can be reconciled.
I’m not sure your question about Saul/Paul because you don’t spell out what you see as an issue in need of reconciliation.
If you are wondering why sometimes Paul and sometimes Saul, then it is the same for Simon and Peter. One’s Greek and the other Hebrew, and it was not uncommon for a “newly born” Christian to take a new name. Matthew/Levi is another example of more than one name.
As always, reconciliation can take time, given, for example, the Pilate stone. It has happened so often that I’ve seen the Bible’s track record of correctness so often that it’s easy for me to say, “it’s only a matter of time”.