Devil's Advocate?

[Botz]

I think there is a danger here of finding a danger where there is no danger. Playing a devils advocate can from time to time be a prudent method of testing an argument, and without trying to put my head completely into the noose, it could be argued that some of the rhetoric employed by the L-rd falls loosely into this category...

I am thinking especially of the story of the woman at the well, where Jesus knows exactly the answer to the questions He asks her, but is eliciting a response so that He can demonstrate His nature (John 4) I think most people understand that nowadays it just means holding back on what you believe and presenting something that you might not hold to in an effort to draw out a response.

There is no power, and no spiritual significance to the term, 'devil's advocate', and you are not bringing any sort of honour to any devil by using it, anymore than eating 'devils on horseback' (prunes wrapped in bacon I think), or picking a devil-in-the-bush (a type of flower).

[Floatingaxe]

I remember being in a mixed small group at the church where I grew up. There was a couple there whose husband I knew well since I was three years old. He was always offering up answers to questions the leader would throw out. It;s a good thing as some people were not always participatory, but we had a few who were. There was no lack of interaction, that's for sure. but Bruce would always take an adversarial stance, rather than offer up his own views. One day I asked him what he was doing with his approaches. He said, "I'm playing Devil's Advocate!"--proud as punch. Well that went on for a couple more weeks and then one of the members of the group who was also an elder at the time took him aside after group and told him to knock it off. He had good reason--we had a new believer in the group who was getting not only mixed signals, but he was getting comfused!

There is no good reason, IMHO to play into the hand of the evil one in such cases. Controlled learning sessions such as Bible school classes, yes, but there is always a risk of unintentionally planting seeds of doubt in brothers and sisters, and perhaps even keeping a seeker at bay.

No, the Lord is not honoured in it. It may be hard for some to speak wisdom, and of their convictions, and so easy to be opposite in views--why? For attention, as this man was? It is so much better for the sake of others to keep quiet. We are told by God to keep our speech wholesome. Playing Devil's Advocate is playing into Satan's hand and jeopardizing our own spiritual reward.

It is best to be known by others as one who speaks wisdom, and not folly, which is a far more excellent reputation in the Lord.

Titus 2:8

Teach the truth so that your teaching can

[KC02]

I respect the original poster's opinion, but I am with you totally.

Let's not allow a religious teachings put us in bondage. We should be at liberty to teach and learn any good way the Lord leads us. The devil would like to saddle us down with so many do's, don'ts and religious ideas that we go insane and no longer effective in any way...

I think there is a danger here of finding a danger where there is no danger. Playing a devils advocate can from time to time be a prudent method of testing an argument, and without trying to put my head completely into the noose, it could be argued that some of the rhetoric employed by the L-rd falls loosely into this category...

I am thinking especially of the story of the woman at the well, where Jesus knows exactly the answer to the questions He asks her, but is eliciting a response so that He can demonstrate His nature (John 4) I think most people understand that nowadays it just means holding back on what you believe and presenting something that you might not hold to in an effort to draw out a response.

There is no power, and no spiritual significance to the term, 'devil's advocate', and you are not bringing any sort of honour to any devil by using it, anymore than eating 'devils on horseback' (prunes wrapped in bacon I think), or picking a devil-in-the-bush (a type of flower).

[Floatingaxe]

We are judged by every idle word we say. Taking the opposite and ungodly side of an issue for any reason other than the fact that it is one's own view is idle and unprofitable speech.

[Botz]

We are judged by every idle word we say. Taking the opposite and ungodly side of an issue for any reason other than the fact that it is one's own view is idle and unprofitable speech.

I cannot help seeing alot of assumptions being used here, and an undercurrent of unnecessary condemnation against imaginary opponents...Cervantes would call it 'tilting at windmills'.

[Guest shiloh357]

We are judged by every idle word we say. Taking the opposite and ungodly side of an issue for any reason other than the fact that it is one's own view is idle and unprofitable speech.

It is just an expression. Playing the "devil's advocate" does not mean that you affirm the "ungodly" side of an issue, particularly if the issue is not religious in nature in the first place.

[Floatingaxe]

We are judged by every idle word we say. Taking the opposite and ungodly side of an issue for any reason other than the fact that it is one's own view is idle and unprofitable speech.

I cannot help seeing alot of assumptions being used here, and an undercurrent of unnecessary condemnation against imaginary opponents...Cervantes would call it 'tilting at windmills'.

What does God say?

[Floatingaxe]

We are judged by every idle word we say. Taking the opposite and ungodly side of an issue for any reason other than the fact that it is one's own view is idle and unprofitable speech.

why does it have to be an "unGodly" side that the Devil's Advocate is taking? There is a lot of area between one's own view and an unGodly view.

many people have very weak arguments for what they believe and unless it is somehow pointed out to them they will not know it.

Just because it has the word "devil" in it, that does not make it wrong.

And no it is no it is neither idle nor unprofitable. It seems the only people that would not be profited would be those that are too stubborn to look at an issue in more than on tiny way.

If one does NOT hold the view they are arguing with, it is indeed idle talk. We are discussing playing "devil's advocate", and not the term used for it. Calling it just an expression is trying to downplay the seriousness of indulging in it. If one cannot present one's beliefs using wise words out of the knowledge of a spiritual matter, but instead chooses the opposing side of the spiritual matter, where one's words have power as God says, what will Jesus Christ credit to your account?

[Botz]

In the context of what has been written in this thread He might well exonerate the subtlety of words, and the freedom of expression. If you are looking for an answer about giving an account for every idle word (Matt 12:36) as defined by your understanding of what that entails, then that might make an interesting study, but to put it mildly it could be paraphrased as..."Engage your brain before you open your gob."

[Floatingaxe]

In the context of what has been written in this thread He might well exonerate the subtlety of words, and the freedom of expression. If you are looking for an answer about giving an account for every idle word (Matt 12:36) as defined by your understanding of what that entails, then that might make an interesting study, but to put it mildly it could be paraphrased as..."Engage your brain before you open your gob."