The Bible And Taqiyya [Part 7]=Deception
Mohamad Mostafa Nassar
16:1 The Lord said to Samuel, “How long will you mourn for Saul, since I have rejected him as king over Israel? Fill your horn with oil and be on your way; I am sending you to Jesse of Bethlehem. I have chosen one of his sons to be king.”
2 But Samuel said, “How can I go? If Saul hears about it, he will kill me.” The Lord said, “Take a heifer with you and say, ‘I have come to sacrifice to the Lord.’
3 Invite Jesse to the sacrifice, and I will show you what to do. You are to anoint for me the one I indicate.” –
1 Samuel 16:1-3
Reading the above passage is indicative from the language that YHWH is telling Samuel to lie, and to be deceptive. This is another proof, from many other verses in the Bible that under certain circumstances YHWH endorses and approves of lying in order to accomplish a higher good.
The Ten Commandments: The Significance of God’s Laws in Everyday Life – Dr. Laura Schlessinger & Rabbi Stewart Vogel
In another biblical story God actually told the prophet Samuel to lie. When God informed Samuel that He was sending him to find another king (God had rejected King Saul and his heirs for the kingship), he replied, ‘How shall I god? For, if Saul hears, he will kill me.’ To which Go counselled, ‘You shall take a heifer with you, and you shall say, I have come to slaughter to the Lord’ (Samuel 16:2).
In spite of the fact that Samuel did not ‘come to slaughter to the Lord,’ God gave him permission to say so. From God’s own lips we learn telling a lie to save a life is allowable. 
Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
It was the purpose of God that David should be anointed at this time as Saul’s successor, and as the ancestor and the type of His Christ. It was not the purpose of God that Samuel should stir up a civil war, by setting up David as Saul’s rival. SECRECY, THEREFORE, WAS A NECESSARY PART OF THE TRANSACTION. But secrecy and concealment are not the same as duplicity and falsehood. Concealment of a good purpose, for a good purpose, is clearly justifiable. 
Joseph Benson’s Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
1 Samuel 16:2. How can I go? — That is, with safety. Say, I am come to sacrifice to the Lord — Which he, being a prophet, might do anywhere, all the ritual laws being subject to the prophets. What the Lord commanded him to say was a truth, though not the whole truth. 
Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary on the Bible
IV. God orders him to cover his design with a sacrifice: Say, I have come to sacrifice; and it was true he did, and it was proper that he should, when he came to anoint a king, 1 Samuel 11:15. As a prophet, he might sacrifice when and where God appointed him;
and it was not all inconsistent with the laws of truth to say he came to sacrifice when really he did so, thought he had also a further end, which he thought fit to conceal. Let him give notice of a sacrifice, and invite Jesse (who, it is probable, was the principal man of the city) and his family to come to the feast upon the sacrifice;
2`and, says God, I will show thee what thou shalt do. Those that go about God’s work in God’s way shall be directed step by step, wherever they are at a loss, to do it in the best manner. 
The Pulpit Commentary
The question has been asked, Was there in this any duplicity?
In answer we may ask another question: Is it always necessary, or even right, to tell in all cases the whole truth? If so, quarrels and ill-feeling would be multiplied to such an extent that social life would be unendurable. All charitable, well disposed persons suppress much, and keep a guard over their lips, lest they should stir up strife and hatred.
Now here there was to be no treason, no inciting to civil war. David, still a child, was to be set apart for a high destiny, possibly without at the time fully knowing what the anointing meant, and certainly with the obligation to take no step whatsoever towards winning the crown that was to descend upon his head. This was his probation, and he bore the trial nobly.
And what right would Samuel have had, not merely to compel David to be a traitor, but to place Jesse and his family in a position of danger and difficulty? To have anointed David publicly would have forced Jesse to an open rupture with the king, and he must have sought safety either by fighting for his life.
Or by breaking up his home, and fleeing into a foreign land. David in course of time had thus to seek an asylum for his parents (1 Samuel 22:3, 1 Samuel 22:4), but it was through no fault of his own, for he always remained true to his allegiance.
Even when David was being hunted for his life, he made no appeal to Samuel’s anointing, but it remained, what it was ever intended to be, a secret sign and declaration to him of God’s preordained purpose, but of one as to which he was to take no step to bring about its fulfilment. It was a pledge to David, and nothing but misery would have resulted from its being prematurely made known to those who had no right to know it.
God wraps up the flower, which is in due time to open and bear fruit, within many a covering; and to rend these open prematurely is to destroy the flower and the fruit that is to spring from it. And so to have anointed David openly, and to have made him understand the meaning of the act, would have been to destroy David and frustrate the Divine purpose. 
John Trapp Complete Commentary
And say, I am come to sacrifice.] This a prophet might do at any time, and in any place. “In everything give thanks.” But when a king was to be anointed, there was a kind of necessity in this service. Neither was Samuel bound to tell all that he came about. Some part of a truth may lawfully be concealed out of civil prudence. See the like done, Jeremiah 38:27. 
 The Ten Commandments: The Significance of God’s Laws in Everyday Life By Dr. Laura Schlessinger & Rabbi Stewart Vogel page 281
 Barnes Notes on the Bible
 Joseph Benson’s Commentary of the Old and New Testaments
 Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary on the Bible
 The Pulpit Commentary
 John Trapp Complete Commentary