Faith Versus Courage: What Wins the Battles

Then Jonathan said to the young man who was carrying his armor, "Come and let us cross over to the garrison of these uncircumcised; perhaps the LORD will work for us, for the LORD is not restrained to save by many or by few." His armor bearer said to him, "Do all that is in your heart; turn yourself, and here I am with you according to your desire." (1 Samuel 14:6-7 NASB)

Then Saul said to Ahijah, "Bring the ark of God here." For the ark of God was at that time with the sons of Israel.  While Saul talked to the priest, the commotion in the camp of the Philistines continued and increased; so Saul said to the priest, "Withdraw your hand."  Then Saul and all the people who were with him rallied and came to the battle; and behold, every man's sword was against his fellow, and there was very great confusion. (1 Samuel 14:18-20 NASB)

As I read 1 Samuel 14, the whole of it turns on this concept of courage and faith.  In combat, courage is not a luxury, it's a necessity.  But courage is not as simple as just being able to charge the machine gun nest and be shot.  Courage means doing what you fear to do, not what your brain tells you is ridiculous to do.  Sometimes it's faith that inspires the ridiculous.

I pulled the two passages above because both introduce engaging the enemy, and both demonstrate courage (even the second one).  But one demonstrates faith where the other does not.  The success of the battle was determined by faith, not courage.

The setting is that 600 Israelites are in Geba and Gibeah, facing 30,000 Philistines; so the odds are lopsided in the extreme.  Raiding parties have gone out looking for the Israelites (like recon-by-fire) because they've hidden in crags, holes and so on.  The Philistines know the people are out there, just no idea where.  So, it's not really a stalemate, it's more like a lull before the Philistine "boot" crushes Israel.

So, in the midst of this "lull", Jonathan and his "armor bearer" decide to engage the Philistine garrison on their own.  The reason is Jonathan figures numbers aren't really a problem for God.  That's his reasoning, even though it's ridiculous, from a military standpoint, for two people to take on an entire garrison.  But his reasoning derives from his faith, so, from a military standpoint, two people walk with the army of the Maker of the heavens and the earth.  Now the odds are still lopsided, but the other way. 

That's faith: to see the "unseen" and be sure of it in the face of what is seen.  Again courage faces fear, real or imagined.  Faith discerns what is unseen and walks in confidence.  Sometimes faith looks like wisdom, sometimes it looks like extreme foolishness.  Sometimes it takes courage to move belief to faith (belief in action). 

Saul realizes the Philistines have been engaged, but not how.  He musters the troops (600-2) and discovers his son and his armor bearer are gone, so now he knows how.  Then he calls for the Ark to inquire of God (possibly he calls for the priest with the Ephod...long story).  But when the battle grows he decides he has enough to go on, and calls the 598 to follow him in joining the battle against the 30,000.

This still takes courage.  It's still extremely lopsided odds on the surface.  I'm pretty sure Saul wanted to know if he should engage the enemy.  But then he figured that the momentum of battle was already there, so he needed to act quick to keep it in his favor.  It makes sense from a military standpoint.  In fact it made sense to those who had run away, and those who had joined their enemies as well.  The people came from their hidy-holes, and even those in the Philistine camp rejoined Israel in the battle switching sides...again, as it were. 

Joining the battle as it had clearly turned against the Philistines at that point was a no-brainer.  Everyone got in on it, but they knew Jonathan had started it.  It was clear that the faith of one brought the victory, not the 600 in Gibeah, not the return of those in hiding, and not the return of the unfaithful among Philistines.  Courage was displayed on the part of many, but faith was displayed by one.  Courage didn't bring victory, it was faith.  Okay, it's possible to see it as courageous faith, but it is still faith in its essence, not courage.

So what do I learn?  I learn that reasoning, sound foundational principles of leadership, finance, and planning are not the keys to success.  They are important, and I don't discount them; I have skills in all of them.  But the key to success is reckless abandon to my Master in faith; belief in action.  So when I'm faced with extremely lopsided odds to accomplish the work of my Master, I don't need to "figure it out" using foundational principles.  I need to act on my belief that the Master of the universe leads me into the fray.

Ends, Means, and Justification: How God Connects Them

Now he waited seven days, according to the appointed time set by Samuel, but Samuel did not come to Gilgal; and the people were scattering from him.   So Saul said, "Bring to me the burnt offering and the peace offerings." And he offered the burnt offering.  As soon as he finished offering the burnt offering, behold, Samuel came; and Saul went out to meet him and to greet him.  But Samuel said, "What have you done?" And Saul said, "Because I saw that the people were scattering from me, and that you did not come within the appointed days, and that the Philistines were assembling at Michmash, therefore I said, 'Now the Philistines will come down against me at Gilgal, and I have not asked the favor of the LORD.' So I forced myself and offered the burnt offering."  Samuel said to Saul, "You have acted foolishly; you have not kept the commandment of the LORD your God, which He commanded you, for now the LORD would have established your kingdom over Israel forever.  But now your kingdom shall not endure. The LORD has sought out for Himself a man after His own heart, and the LORD has appointed him as ruler over His people, because you have not kept what the LORD commanded you." (1 Samuel 13:8-14 NASB)

 This whole chapter seems either made up of pieces that didn't originally belong together or designed from the outset to make Saul look bad.  That second option may sound worse than it should since most of Samuel and Kings, and even Chronicles simply support the Davidic line of kings.  That would be hard to do if Saul comes off as a hero and great leader.  So it's possible he wasn't quite as bad as it seems, at least in "leadership" terms.

In a sense, Saul makes a good "leadership" decision.  It looks good from the standpoint of the need of the moment, the reality of the situation, and as a pragmatic option.  The one flaw in what he did is that it disobeyed God.  One flaw, but it was a fatal flaw.  If you take the time to read the entirety of the next chapter, it finishes off with a positive summary of Saul's reign.  He probably was a great leader.  But God wants more.

I have a huge book of "Leadership" books by John Maxwell on my work desk.  It's there partly because that was one of the things we could read at work.  But it is also there because I like his work.  He writes it from the standpoint of secular leadership, and I'm sure that for much of it Saul was right there with it.  But I know a bit about John Maxwell's background, and I know he is a believer in Jesus.  His work does not contradict Scripture, but an element that doesn't appear in most of his books is obedience to God.

What I learn from Saul is that obedience is better than going through the process or actions of worship.  He sacrificed what was needed, he did so to God, but he didn't do so in faith, he did it in pragmatic wisdom.  When it came down to it, he relied on himself rather than God.  And that, more than any other thing is probably what characterized his downfall.  Discussions about whether he suffered from some mental/emotional ailment are all well and good, but what destroyed him was his deviation from God's design.

Ironically, he had the same purpose as God, to drive out the Philistines.  Saul had the right goal, he just had more faith in himself than he had in the God of Israel.  He wanted God to bless his plans his way; to follow him instead of the other way around.  Samuel reveals to Saul that God wants something else, a "man after His own heart." 

When Samuel says that, literally, it says "a man as His own heart", as if the heart of the man God chooses matches, corresponds to, looks much like the heart of the Creator of the universe.  I tended to think of it as someone who pursues the heart of God (i.e. chases after...).  But this wording really means that David will be someone who looks very much like God's heart, as if he has God's heart.  That is very different; that describes someone who doesn't have to "pursue" God's heart because he's already got it. 

I didn't even think that was possible.  What does it mean that it is possible?  I feel a paradigm shift coming on.  Great.  I love change, especially fundamental character change...oh wait.  So what I have been pursuing, believing that's what my Master wants, I'm actually supposed to already have.  I'm supposed to have it so I can be of use to my Master in His purposes but also His designs.  Rather than spending time seeking, I'm supposed to already have it, and be busy with it.  Oh lovely.  Why does that feel like the day of the big exam at school, and I realize I've been studying the wrong chapter? 

I hate that feeling, like most people.  I feel like such an idiot, and that's an uncomfortable feeling.  But I think that becoming comfortable with that feeling of being an idiot is the beginning of humility.  It's the acceptance of my true standing before my Master.  Then I can also become comfortable with my Master's ways as opposed to feeling compelled to follow my own (remember how Saul had to "force himself" to disobey?). 

So, I'm supposed to live life "dumbed down" before my Master.  And my enjoyment of intelligent appearance must be laid at the feet of my Master.  And the reality of my wisdom (or lack thereof) should be my new "comfort zone."  I'm seriously thinking of re-writing this, but it's what I need.  Excuse me while I submit this too to my Master and relinquish more of my pride and myself.  Hopefully the next time we meet I'll look more like my Master than the old me.  Hope, hope, hope...

Post-Failure Procedures

Samuel said to the people, "Do not fear. You have committed all this evil, yet do not turn aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart. (1 Samuel 12:20 NASB)

 I messed up the same way for so long, I seriously wondered if my Master even still knew my name.  I was struggling with the same stupid stuff over and over, and even still, now and again, it comes back to haunt me.  How much sin is too much for my Master before He rejects me?

Well, when I stumbled on this verse in 1 Samuel, my heart seized it in excitement.  Here is something I can go back to, over and over even.  The reason it excited me was because each time I failed (again), I would wonder, "What now?"  As if I'm the prodigal son who thought after messing up, he couldn't go home.  But that is pride, a lever used by my enemy to create a wedge between my Master and me.

Once Samuel had demonstrated that He and their God were on the same page (thunder and rain to prove it), they were terrified of God because they had made this mistake of asking for a king.  This verse is Samuel's response to them, and my Master's to me.  The answer to the question, "What do I do now?" after failing my Master is to serve my Master with all my heart.

Perhaps revisiting "heart" here might be a good idea.  In our culture or society, heart means the center of the emotions.  In that culture/society, it means the center of a person's determination and stamina; perhaps we'd call it "focus", but with staying power.  So, to serve my Master with all my heart means to serve Him with all my determination and stamina.  How far can I run without collapse in a heap of gasping and wheezing?  That's how far and to what extent I serve my Master; until I have nothing left.  Think "Brock Kelly and his 100-yard death crawl" in Facing the Giants.

It's nice to have an answer, also good to have some understanding of what it means in general, but what does it mean specifically?  That may be a personal thing where for each person, the answer is different.  For me, the answer is manifold: Family, Work, Church, and my Community.  These are the venues in which the answer is lived out. 

It's not enough to "love my family" but that love is lived out in service to my Master.  It's not enough to "show up to work" but that presence is to be a conduit for the grace and love of my Master into those I work with, for, and on.  It's not enough that I "attend church", I am to roll up my sleeves and serve my fellows and serve with them.  It's not enough that I am "in the community", I am to engage with my neighbors, my community leaders, and always bring the light of my Master into every conversation.

So, for me, that is what it means to serve my Master with all my heart.  What does it mean for you?  While you're working over that thought, I have to ready myself to serve my Master at my job.  Blessings upon you!

The Danger of Being Loved by my Master

Samuel said to the people, "Do not fear. You have committed all this evil, yet do not turn aside from following the LORD, but serve the LORD with all your heart.  You must not turn aside, for then you would go after futile things which can not profit or deliver, because they are futile.  For the LORD will not abandon His people on account of His great name, because the LORD has been pleased to make you a people for Himself." (1 Samuel 12:20-22 NASB)

"Only fear the LORD and serve Him in truth with all your heart; for consider what great things He has done for you.  But if you still do wickedly, both you and your king will be swept away." (1 Samuel 12:24-25 NASB)

Samuel makes his last public address in Gilgal after Saul has been ratified as king for the second time.  In it he asserts his own innocence and calls the people to affirm it and God to witness.  Then he affirms the faithfulness of God, while simultaneously the faithlessness of the people; right up to asking for a king.  Then he calls on God to punctuate what he's saying to the people by spontaneously bringing thunder and rain (out of season).

The people are terrified and call on Samuel to continue to pray for them so they won't die.  His response to them is mostly above.  I chose these two elements out of his response because they bring out a part of God's character which is sadly misunderstood today.  In my childhood, my Master was not described to me this way, at least that's not what I caught from the teaching.

What way?  Well, while I do remember the power of my Master to create and shake His creation, sweeping away His people wasn't one of the elements I remember.  Think about the two elements, one that He is pleased to make a people for Himself, and two that He will sweep them away for causing evil.  They appear contradictory, but obviously aren't.

Here's what I believe is missed about the character of my Master in this passage.  I believe that my Master demonstrates enormous grace and mercy in His choice of me.  Clearly there is nothing inherent in my behavior and attitudes that warrants such attention from my Holy Creator. But the love of my Master for me is also guided by His holiness, which constantly directs me into more of this same character.  In order to accomplish this direction, my Master will sweep me away if necessary to remove me from an environment where I have lost my moorings to Him.

Is that a lot to get from this passage?  Probably.  But this passage occurs in the larger history of the sons of Israel for whom this is exactly what happens.  But this larger story continues on to their restoration, at least partially, to their former place.  What is also true is that the these sons of Israel do not then cease to be the people of God's choice.  So, neither will I.  But as they suffered, and have suffered, neither will I be exempt from such treatment from my Master.  Why would I?

I believe the rational of my Master behind this is the larger story in which the history of the sons of Israel is placed; where my Master seeks to redeem His entire creation.  He chooses a people to use to redeem the rest of the people, including me.  Yet if He will not spare one from being "swept away", why would I believe He will not sweep away the others?  If He does not spare the first chosen from suffering, why would I believe He would spare me? 

Do you see the character quality of my Master peeking through?  But do you see also the critical implication?  There is a danger is drifting away from a pure devotion to my Master.  When I mix it with devotion to things, people, circumstances, and the elements of my life on this planet; then I am in danger of being swept away by Him Whom I have forgotten.  Swept away, along with all the stuff, people, and circumstances I found so distracting.  Perhaps this is an implication of Jesus' words, "If anyone wishes to save his life he will lose it, but whoever loses His life for My sake and the gospel's he will save it." (Matthew 10:39, Mark 8:35, Luke 9:24)  Keep in mind that in these passages, "life" is actually the word "soul".

What I see as my response to this passage is to serve my Master with all my heart.  It confirms the words of my Master to me that I am His servant.  He gave me that designation many years ago in my youth, and I rediscovered it some few years ago while seeking to climb out of my addictive behaviors.  I needed to know who I am, and my Master's definition of me included the designation of His servant.  So that is in my "signature": SOTK, Servant of the King.  The danger of forgetting this is real, tangible, and for my sake because of His holiness and love for me, inflexible.  Now where's my dish towel?  I think I hear my Master calling!  "Here I am, my Master!"

A Double Dog Dare Gone Horribly Wrong

Now Nahash the Ammonite came up and besieged Jabesh-gilead; and all the men of Jabesh said to Nahash, "Make a covenant with us and we will serve you."  But Nahash the Ammonite said to them, "I will make it with you on this condition, that I will gouge out the right eye of every one of you, thus I will make it a reproach on all Israel."  The elders of Jabesh said to him, "Let us alone for seven days, that we may send messengers throughout the territory of Israel. Then, if there is no one to deliver us, we will come out to you." (1 Samuel 11:1-3 NASB)

They said to the messengers who had come, "Thus you shall say to the men of Jabesh-gilead, 'Tomorrow, by the time the sun is hot, you will have deliverance.'" So the messengers went and told the men of Jabesh; and they were glad.  Then the men of Jabesh said, "Tomorrow we will come out to you, and you may do to us whatever seems good to you."  The next morning Saul put the people in three companies; and they came into the midst of the camp at the morning watch and struck down the Ammonites until the heat of the day. Those who survived were scattered, so that no two of them were left together. (1 Samuel 11:9-11 NASB)

There is a sense of the barbaric in that this Nahash wants to gouge out an eye of every towns person.  And then there's this sense of "honor" in that he allows them to send for help.  The false sense of honor is that this is an affront to the people of Israel.  Nahash is taunting them, daring anyone to stop him.  He is confident that they will do nothing and let him be barbaric.  He's a terrorist, a bully, totally confident in his own power to do whatever he wants to anyone.  It doesn't say how many he brought with him, but it wasn't enough.

Saul summons the people in a rather brutal fashion as well, with a threat, although not involving gouging out an eye.  When the terror of God falls on them, 300,000 show up along with 30,000 of Judah (I don't know why they're numbered separately).  Saul splits them into three companies, and marches to help Jabesh.  In the morning they totally rout Nahash and not one of his men is left with another as they are scattered.

The lesson I take from Nahash is that such people do exist.  Perhaps the venue is different today, I may find them at work, but not gouging out eyes.  Perhaps the threat is different, but the attitude remains: totally self-confident that nothing can stop their trampling of others.  What I learn about my Master here is that He does not tolerate such people.  I learn that He calls His people to fearlessly stand against such threats, and aggressively attack and defeat them.  That last part may not sit well with people, but consider the story again.

When Saul summons the people as he does, the "dread of the LORD fell on the people," and they came, not to stand in front of Jabesh but to attach Nahash and destroy his army.  There has been discussion among believers as to when do we stand against the Nahash's of our world, and when do we fight; something called a Christian Manifesto.  I have avoided such talk and discussion because it's uncomfortable, and I think people use it as an excuse to be violent; to justify bad behavior.  On the other hand, I believe there are times when it is necessary.

I know the weapons of our warfare are not carnal, and neither are our "enemies".  But I also understand that this "warfare" is a spiritual battle, mostly regarding the defeat of sin in my life.  This is a different situation.  Here, the battle was carnal/temporal/physical in setting, and it was still a mandate from my Master.  I have to accept that sometimes my Master calls me and my fellow servants of Jesus to fight temporal/physical battles.

Again, the venues may be different, the weapons my be different, but the concept of standing versus attacking remains.  I believe that sometimes attack is warranted, not because I want to be violent.  I believe it's warranted when my Master wants to use me to remove something hindering Him and His plan.  I don't believe He can't remove it without me, but if He wants to use me, it now becomes about obedience. 

And so I'm clear here, in this context, the people did not break the law.  This is where I sense many "manifesto" discussions go off the rails.  They end up looking for an excuse to fight the government or others in violation of the laws of the land.  I don't think that's what my Master leads us to do.  Perhaps, one day, when my country's leaders begin to persecute the servants of Jesus, then I may violate laws to protect my fellows, but it won't be to attack those in power with guns and bombs.  I don't see that path in the response of the early church to persecution by Rome.

The venues of this application I believe are in defense of my family, my church, and my fellow servants of Jesus. And the application is that I actively engage in the arena where the danger appears.  If city hall, then in their meetings; if in business, then in business; if in schools, then schools; wherever the threat appears, I believe I should engage rather than simply stand.  Now, where's my torch and pitch fork, I have some monsters to hunt; who's with me?