One thrilling story of manly valor is found in Second Samuel 10:1-13. It certainly helps us to understand the perplexity of the times and the crucial need for men to arise for the cause of Christ and His people.
At the outset of Second Samuel 10, Israel's enemy the Ammonites appears to have remained quiet since their defeat by King Saul nearly a half century earlier (First Samuel 11). Nahash their king (perhaps a son of the former Nahash) had rendered friendly service to David. But at the ascension of Hanun, Nahash's son, the hostility of the children of Ammon revived and showed itself in a way that made conflict inevitable with Israel. The growing power of David in his subjugation of their kindred the Moabites no doubt also contributed to their change of feelings.
When Hanun comes to the throne after Nahash's death, David decides to send his condolences to Hanun remembering the kindness Nahash had shown David. When David's servants arrive before Hanun, they are met with the ingratitude, contempt, and malignity of Hanun for David and Israel. Others had convinced Hanun that David had sent these men to spy out the nation and to bring scorn upon the nation. Agreeing to these insinuations Hanun showed his disdain of David by shaving off one side of the beards of David's men and by cutting their clothes off from the buttocks downward. On hearing of this humiliation to his men, David sent them to Jericho until their beards were grown again.
The children of Ammon then saw that they "stank" before David and therefore hired a Syrian mercenary army to assist in fighting against Israel. David then raised up an army and sent Joab with the host of mighty men to fight against these warriors. When Joab arrived just in time to prevent the Syrians and Ammonites from unifying their forces, he found himself precariously in-between the two armies: if he were defeated in the front, there would be no escape in the rear. Caught in this situation, Joab leaves Abishai his brother with such troops as he could spare to watch the Ammonites, and he himself took the choicest of men and prepared them to fight the mercenary Syrians. Both brothers would have to watch to see how the battle would go. The ones left with Abashai were ordinary troops who would become disheartened by Joab's failure, so that without extraordinary bravery on their leader's part they would give way and all would be lost. Joab tells his brother Abishai "Be of good courage, and let us play the men for our people, and for the cities of our God: and the Lord do that which seemeth him good" (Second Samuel 10:12).
As the story unfolds Joab strikes the Syrians first because they were mercenaries and would not hold up alone for the sake of the Ammonites. When the children of Ammon see the Syrians flee, they likewise flee. But the Syrians, amidst their shame, regather with greater forces. When David arrives, God gives him the victory.
There seems to be three battles declared in chapters ten and eleven: (1) the war with Ammon and the Syrian (10:6-14); (2) the war with the Syrians (10:15-19); and, (3) the war with Ammon (11:1-27). These battles would be most crucial for Israel, with much at stake and much to be lost. These were battles that demanded men, valiant men, yea, mighty men.
The Warnings of the New Testament
Before viewing this historical account in the light of the present distress in Fundamentalism, it is imperative that we see the times in which we live as Christian Fundamentalists. First, we must understand that Christ's first coming was the commencement of the Last Days (Acts 2:16-21). Thus, Christianity was appointed by God for the Last Days. It also must be observed that the New Testament was written in and for the Last Days. The Day of Pentecost birthed two churches: the true Church (the invisible Body of Christ or the Church of the Firstborn), and the visible, institutional church. On that day both churches were the same and the purest. But the first book written in the New Testament (the book of James, around A.D. 45), revealed already the failings of the institutional Jewish Church. How quickly the apostasy had made inroads into the Jewish churches manifesting itself in the flourishing of carnality and worldliness! It was that same year (Acts 13) that God began to move within the Gentile Church while the Jewish church attempted to mix Christianity with Judaism. The Judaizers eventually tried to pervert the Gospel in the early Gentile churches as it had done within the Jewish churches. The rest of the New Testament, though presenting the doctrine of Christ, was written in the context of warnings against the encroachment of heresies rising and carnalities ever permeating the institutional church.
In the light of this truth, one must be careful in reading Matthew 16:16-18. As the Father had revealed to Peter one thing, "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God," Jesus revealed another thing to him: "And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." The Greek language makes it clear that this rock is the creed of Peter, or the Christ that Peter had just declared in 16:16. The name Peter (Gr., petros, masculine) literally means "a little rock," while petra, "this rock," is referring to a large rock, Christ Himself (First Peter 2:4-8).
Two churches emerged from the New Testament times and have grown throughout the centuries. There is the true Church and there is the institutional church, which has become the false Church. The wheat and tares have grown together over the centuries in the same world and often in the same visible institutional church. It is established in Revelation 2 and 3 that the church in Ephesus had Christ walking in its midst while the Laodicean church found Him standing outside and not part of it. The one true Church is built by Christ its Head; the other is built by the Devil, its head. The devil is building a church, which will become the woman harlot, as Christ is building the true church, His Bride. Christ declared to Peter that the "gates of hell shall not prevail against it." This statement is not referring to the false Church but the true Church. The Greek word hell is hades, the region of the dead. The gates of Hades represent the entrance into Hades or death. The Lord affirmed that death shall have no power over the members of the true church. There may be moments when it seems the gates are succeeding and death is imminent, but God's saints will rise with ultimate triumph. Satan is ever attacking God's saints to wear them out, to overcome them, and to destroy them; but God will not allow it.
This is not true, however, of the institutional church, which will be overcome; it will come to death: it is not built by Christ. Its head is the Devil; he is building his church to become the mother harlot. The tares are the children of the wicked one (Matthew 13:38). The Roman Catholic Church is dead; it has entered through the gates of Hades and has entered Hades, the place of the dead. The United Methodist Church, the U. S. Presbyterian denominations, the Episcopal Church, the Charismatics, the Neo-Evangelicals have all given evidence that the gates of death have taken over; they are all in the throes of Satan. The tares will flourish and multiply giving supposed signs of life; however, spiritually the churches are without Christ and know it not (Revelation 3:17).
The Neo-Christianity of our times will become part of the World Religious Entity to welcome the Son of Perdition. If it were possible the very elect would be deceived by these tares (Matthew 24:24), but thank God the true Church, the Elect, will never come to the entrance of death; the gates of hell will never destroy it.
The Fall of Historical Fundamentalism?
History has proved that the historic Christian Fundamentalist movement was divinely appointed by God for the end time of the Last Days to combat the final onslaught of the enemies within the institutional church against God's Word and against the true remnant, the Elect. But as is the potential danger of any movement and its mutation in every generation, we may be witnessing the institution of Christian Fundamentalism coming to the gates of hell. The true remnant within Fundamentalism will not be destroyed, but it seems that the public view of the movement, as it is being redirected, will experience its historical demise. Fundamentalism's militancy yet magnificence of former days and glory is being brought to death, while the "ism" of its institutionalism is bringing an emergence of a "Neo-Fundamentalism" that is nothing more than Neo-Evangelicalism. There is no difference now between the public view of Fundamentalism and Neo-Evangelicalism.
Second Samuel 10 Seen Today
It is not easy to live fully by the principles of God in this contemporary hour. These are not days that encourage strength within Fundamentalism. These are days when compromise is the pressing call, when the battle, the testings, and political correctness are pressing upon God's men. These are days when shocking things are happening; while one endeavors to stand, others flee. Within this story of Second Samuel 10, we find crucial warnings and hopeful decisions for us as men in the final conflict with the global end-time apostasy.
The first men to be noted in this conflict are the enemies, the Ammonites and the mercenaries called the Syrians. We must ever know our enemies: the world, the flesh, the devil, at times our thoughts, people of this world, philosophies, religions, Neo-Christianity, the media, the public school system, contemporary science, the medical-world system, businesses, governments, etc. Some of these may have been at least friendly to God's people in the past and even assisted God's people in kindness like a Nahash to David. But this is not true today. There is a mood, a spirit, and a trend that mark the world today with hostility towards the God of Scripture. True Christianity has fewer and fewer friends. The entire world, the nations, the philosophies, and religions are gathering together for an overthrow of the true Christ and His true people. We are now facing the reality of Psalm 2:
Why do the heathen rage, and the people imagine a vain thing? The kings of the earth set themselves, and the rulers take counsel together, against the Lord, and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us.
Even those who were neutral in the past are now being bought to become mercenaries in the battle to overthrow God's elect.
A second group of men to be noted are David's representatives to Hanun. There are men who identify themselves with evangelicalism and Fundamentalism who have tried to become ambassadors and representatives for God's people. They believe there is hope with these enemies; they want to dialogue and act in kindness with the enemies. But half of their beard has been shaved and the lower parts of their body have been exposed. The beard was the symbol of manhood. The beard was also a symbol of a free man; to cut even half of it was to count one as a slave. Moreover, only the priests, not king's servants, wore undergarments; the cutting of the robe just above the buttocks was a vile and abominable affront. We are in a fearful day when young men believe that there is hope with some of these enemies. We have seen some who have gone on national television with powerful media personalities believing it would be a testimony for Christ. But time has proved it has not been so. To the contrary, such actions have weakened and caused the "man of God" to compromise in principle before the world and to become less manly in his spiritual strength before God. The blogs of our day are drawing a wholesale number of young fundamentalists to write their own "two-cents worth," believing that dialogue is the way within Fundamentalism. But there is no spiritual growth to come from it. Like the media talk shows, everyone says what he wants to say, but nothing is ever accomplished:
But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes (Second Timothy 2:23).
O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science [knowledge] falsely so called: Which some professing have erred concerning the faith (First Timothy 6:20-21).
A growing number of young men believe there is hope for Neo-Evangelicalism and for those men who lead the mega-church movement. Others believe we need to now allow our Christian schools to be accredited so as to assist our students to further themselves in acceptance in the eyes of the world; it also allows the influx of monies from federal Pell grants into our schools. School presidents who condemned regional and national accreditation back in the 1980s, declaring that the secular philosophical influence would hurt the purpose of God's schools, now believe that accreditation from a "Neo-Christian" perspective has no philosophical or theological influence. The religious accrediting organizations of our time are clearly sympathetic towards Neo-Evangelical and Charismatic schools. How can true Fundamentalists be associated with Liberty University, Regent University, Heritage Bible College, and other full-fledged Neo-Christianity schools? What we feared from the secular philosophy accrediting organizations may be less of a concern when we consider religious accreditation and the influence of the Neo-Evangelical and Charismatic schools' philosophies on such accrediting organizations.
We are also hearing in a bold fashion from the blogs of the young fundamentalists and in their journalistic reasoning that not all Contemporary Christian Music is wrong. Such music should be allowed to become part of the emerging contemporary Fundamentalism. The years of assimilating the easy-listening music in our homes and youth camps have brought us to accept the CCM as part of the new fabric being woven for modern Fundamentalism. Such reasoning is destroying our young men; many are capitulating to Neo-Evangelicalism; they do not see the danger and the evil of this heretical thinking.
Although the woman harlot of Revelation 17 will be allowed for a season to ride upon the back of the beast, she will ultimately be destroyed by the beast as he turns on her to hate her, make her desolate and naked, eat her flesh, and burn her with fire (verse 16). Like contemporary American secular opinion, Fundamentalism is growing more and more against the necessity of any kind of warfare. We are losing our manliness for the battle and as Samson we will become slaves to Neo-Christianity. We want to be friends with the enemies, to get along with them. But the enemies never change; they are still enemies of God! Fundamentalism's nakedness will eventually appear as it loses to the enemy the clothing of Christ. It will also expose the "seed" of the future of true Fundamentalism to open shame.
A third division of men in the events of Second Samuel 10 can be typified in the character Abashai. Abashai was the son of David's sister Zeruiah and a brother of Joab. He was the chief of the second group of three among David's mighty men. He first joined David when he was in flight from Saul. He remained true to David his entire life. In David's old age Abashai heard the cry of his king when one of Goliath's sons was ready to kill David. He succored David and came and killed the giant, pleading with David not to go out to battle again ere the lamp of Israel would go out (Second Samuel 21:17). There are some men still remaining in Fundamentalism today who will stand in loyalty to God, His Word, and to other godly men who are still in the battle. Though less cunning, they are equal in courage and relentless toward the foe. There is an austerity about such men in what seems to be cruelty during times of battle. But David understood them and their genuine heart for God. Their greatest trait is unswerving loyalty to God's men, standing firm amidst the intensity of the battle. The nominal crowd does not understand them, but God has placed within them a valor for the battle. They hear the divine appointment for their life and wait command. They are men who help in the battle, they are men of courage, and they play the man for God and for the needed example to the people of God. Other cities, other churches, other schools, and other ministries will hear of their exploits in the heat of the battle for Truth.
A fourth group of men is typified in the man Joab. Joab also was a son of Zeruiah, David's sister. He became the captain of the host of David. He was a man of greatness and instilled manliness in others. Although there were failures in Joab's life (ultimately he was in league against David when Adonijah, one of David's sons, tried to take the throne at the end of David's life), we do find him in this battle as a great warrior for God's nation and king. Here he was a cunning man for the battle and inspired his brother to face the odds against them. To such men others look in the battle especially when it seems the odds are against them. They inspire others with manliness to fight the good fight, to give strategy for war. They condemn neutrality and compromise, leading others with fidelity of life and heart. They discern what is at stake if the battle is lost; they know what will happen in the scattering of the people and the loss of the cities, local churches, and schools who are looking to them in hope. God knows we need men like this in Fundamentalism today: those who cry to us to "play the man" for God and not give in to the times. At the same time, we must be warned by Joab's failures as well.
Conclusion
There is a final man to witness in these battles: David the king. He was truly a great, militant leader in his prime. He too inspired manliness in young men. He fought Goliath and many campaigns against the Philistines, the uncircumcised enemy of God. In the first battle of Second Samuel 10 he is absent; in the second battle he is present. At the time of the third battle (chapter 11), he is at home, resting and facing the temptation of his mid-life through the powers of the flesh. He is about 52 or 53 years old at this time. Here David typifies those leaders who are caught in great temptation and danger in the prime of their ministry and leadership. The changes in life seem to give liberty of thought that the fighting of battles is no longer needed.
Some of the greatest tragedies we now are witnessing are from men who led us in past battles, who taught us to use the sword, whose spiritual battle tactics inspired courage and valor in us. But now we see them failing, refusing to go out as before, sitting back in worldly titles while other powers are now taking over and destroying us as a movement. God's men cannot withdraw from the battles now; they cannot lay down their title of preacher, reformer, and soldier of the cross for titles they believe on earth are greater.
My earthly father often said, "Don't ever stoop to become President of the United States if God has called you to be a preacher." We may have thought at one time that political involvement of ministers was needed. But we are now witnessing the destruction that politics will eventually have on the independent voice of a God-appointed preacher as well as the forced compromise it will demand such who stay in governmental leadership. There will be no crowns received in heaven for such human appointments, especially if we capitulate to the very enemies that we once fought. Such changes by such seasoned men will affect other men. David's failure will affect Joab, his other wives, another man's wife, a child in death, and other sons. A total of nineteen people ultimately will die because of this sin of a leader. How are the mighty fallen! Will Roman Catholicism and Protestantism ecumenically come together via the garb of preacher and prime minister? Will the champion of Israel against the Philistines be taken by a Philistine Delilah and become "weak, and be as another man" (Judges 16:7, 11, 17)? The anointing of the past could be forfeited by the compromise of biblical separation and the relinquishing of a Nazarite vow with God. One could shake himself as he did at other times and be convinced that the Lord is still present because of continued abilities, but the shaking could be of habit and memory rather than the fresh anointing presence of God.
Two final articles will be needed on this subject of the rise and fall of Christian Fundamentalism. In these days of such a falling away, may God raise up a remnant of men to "play the man for the people of God and for the cities of God." May we be of good courage, know the enemy, hate compromise and neutrality, and live a spiritual life of consecration to God for our generation. "Let us play the men for our people, and for the cities of our God: and the Lord do that which seemeth him good."