1. I Samuel 1:11. Why was the absence of a razor, as in the Nazirite vow, a holy thing?

Some say that the growing of hair is the expression of strength, a symbol of God’s power upon a person. Note the difference today between such a vow and the normal shortness of hair recommended by Paul. Long hair for a man is normally a shame to him, as it is unnatural. More natural is the long hair of a woman, and she now reflects the glory of God given to her husband.

It was the growing of hair in the Jewish vow that made a person stand out as one who was devoted to God. That is, the norm was shorter hair, cut on a regular basis. A person who had taken the vow would stand out as God’s special property. So Moses and Paul are in agreement here. The standard haircut for a man is a short one. Only under unusual circumstances should long hair be considered a male thing.

2. I Samuel 2:25. “They” would not listen, for “the Lord” desired to kill them. What do you make of this wording?

Pharaoh comes to mind in dealing with this passage. The Lord must punish the proud disobedient heart. Yes, the Lord does desire to kill. Think of the flood. It was not his Creator/Father heart that rejoiced in taking life (God is not willing that any should perish, says the Word) , but we cannot ever forget that sin is going to be judged, not by a timid apologetic Deity, but by one who champions righteousness and justice.

It is the same Jesus who weeps over Jerusalem that comes to judge the Earth with the fire of God. Let’s tell it all.

3. I Samuel 2:30. God cannot change. What/where is the original promise? Was the promise conditional? Can God retract a promise?

Promises of unending blessings for Aaron’s family are recorded in Exodus 28:43, 29:9, and Numbers 25:13. But for certain ones, the promise is withdrawn. The promise of Canaan for the original Israelites seemed sure, but Israel’s unbelief changed that promise into a delayed, deferred plan. In both cases the promise was kept, but not in the way originally thought.

Another hard saying. First, I will bless you forever. Second, I refuse to bless you. But step back and see the works of God from the creation of man. First it is “Be fruitful and multiply,” “and God saw all that He had made, and it was very good.” That’s early Genesis. Within a few short chapters all but one family destroyed!

Herein is the amazing quality of grace. For, since all have sinned, all deserve what the people of the flood received. All deserve eternal judgment. But God wills that some will be saved in spite of this, through Jesus’ work on Calvary.

The Lord cannot change. He is righteous through and through. His decrees are made in the Light of that righteousness and true justice. When man changes, the original contracts are broken.

The difference with us is that the contract He has made for sinners is sealed in His own blood. We may have confidence that this contract will never be broken, not because of our faithfulness or our works, but because of what He did.

So in our context here, originally the blessing was to go through Eleazar, or so it seems. Something transferred it to Ithamar, something of which we are unaware. But here, the blessing is switched again. Ithamar’s line will be cut off in just a few chapters.

God’s ways are God’s ways. We don’t question. But it is man who is changeable, not God.

4. I Samuel 9:12-14. Wasn’t sacrifice on the “high place” forbidden?

Yes indeed, for this was the way of the pagan religion. But in these days of apostasy and the possible ruin of the normal place of worship in Shiloh, God granted special blessing and permission to the only true man of God of the day. When Rome and other churches have gone through their several apostasies, where can the true people of God worship and find a relationship with Heaven?

5. I Samuel 10:6. Is it possible for the Holy Spirit to come upon a man, yet that man be rejected? Is this anointing about the person or about the Kingdom?

A serious question and problem of our own day. There seems to be a distinction during the days of the kings between the royal anointing and the personal one. Saul was anointed to be king, and he failed in that respect. Hence the Spirit had to be removed from him for kingly business. But recall that personal filling of the Spirit began in earnest at Pentecost. Our era is certainly a different one, where all of God’s “kings and priests”, i.e. his people, may receive from heaven.

Consider Samson, who had an anointing of power used for the conquering of God’s enemies. But that particular anointing did not seem to carry over into his personal life. We do not know of Samson’s relationship to God, only of the coming and going of the leadership anointing upon him.

Another one to consider, though, is David. He seems to have combined a personal walk with God, with a mighty unction to lead God’s people. He was also in the line that leads to the Messiah, and thus the blessing of God never left him, though the kingship was very shaky at times. When David floundered in his personal life, he was still king. And when the kingship seemed at stake, he was still David, the sweet Psalmist of Israel.

God has a people. The Spirit of God will come upon them, live within them, and guide them to glory. There are also those, as in Hebrews, who are “made partakers of the Holy Spirit” perhaps in a miraculous gifted way, who will never produce the fruit of that Spirit and will be rejected.