Use in a sentence: "I don't believe that is true any more than you do, but I'm just playing devil's advocate here."
Two people are arguing (debate style) until one of them starts to state opposing claims as if they were their own claims. The one arguer asks, "What are you doing? Do you really believe that?" and then the other responds, "No, I'm just playing devil's advocate." The argument continues, but now with one person arguing in favor of their own held beliefs while the other argues in favor of beliefs they supposedly oppose.
When it comes to playing "devil's advocate"...Christians should NOT play this game.
Do we, as Christians, really want to argue in favor of what we are against (even if it's only done hypothetically)? We should only argue in favor of what we do believe, not taking the side of anything less than the Truth. Arguments from the earth are arguments from the sinful flesh, so why should we ever adopt them? Paul writes that "though we walk in the flesh, we are not waging war [in this case arguments] according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh but have divine power to destroy strongholds. We destroy arguments and every lofty opinion raised against the knowledge of God, and take every thought captive to obey Christ" (2 Corinthians 10:3-5). Since our weapons (our primary one being the Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God) are so strong, we have no good reason to ever abandon them for some lofty opinion. Why would someone sheath their finest sword in the middle of comabt to weild a flimsy butter knife (for even a few seconds)?
So, where does the phrase "devil's advocate" come from? The phrase comes from a time when the Roman Catholic church appointed someone to be the Advocatus Diaboli (devil's advocate). Their job was to question the validity of miracles that were presented before the church for Catholic canonization. This official would play the part of the devil and inspire doubt for any miracles presented, in order to run the presented miracles through thorough scrutinization (this person litterally played the devil). This was not done so the church could have someone pretend to be the devil during theological arguments. Why would we as Christ's chosen and redeemed ever want to advocate for arguments of the enemy who desires our destruction? How can we justify speaking (even pretending to speak) on behalf of someone who "was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him" (John 8:44)? That enemy of God can play himself, and he does so everyday, prowling "around like a roaring lion looking for someone to devour" (1 Peter 5:8).
Worth mentioning; in addition to there being an Advocatus Diaboli, there was an Advocatus Dei (God's advocate). Their job was to point out the merits found within presented miracles. This asks the question, "Should we play God's avocate?" I'm not sure we can. We can't play God very well, considering our fallen sinful natures mess with the whole being perfect thing. In addition to this, we as Christians should not pretend to be someone we are not for an argument's sake. In our arguments we should play ourselves, children of the living God who have been comissioned to go into the world and "make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything [God has] commanded" (Matthew 28:19-20). That is the part God has given us and (all things considered) it's a good part.
Sources
- The Bible (New International Version)
- Should a Christian Play Devil's Advocate?
- 23 Bible Verses about Satan
No comments:
Post a Comment