# The application of humility in formal debate



## Jash Comstock (Apr 29, 2014)

I think the opinion of many Christians (especially outside reformed circles) is that debate and humility are polar opposites. But Paul was pretty blunt when it comes to calling out heresy or heterodox doctrine. Even in the early church and during the reformation elders and scholars debated doctrine and sociological issues through proper avenues. My question is this, when debating through proper forums (internet forums, physical debate, or more academic avenues) how does one practically apply humility? How do we promote unity while debating the issues?


----------



## Cymro (Apr 29, 2014)

It seems to me if we really espoused the teaching of Philip2:1-5 in
an experimental way then any debate or contention would be conducted
with a spirit of humility .
"Lowliness of mind"and so esteeming other better than oneself.
"One mind",having the same love,being of one accord.
"Like minded ",having the same love.
"The mind of Christ"
He made himself of no reputation(made himself nothing).
Humbled himself, emptied himself, emptied himself of self,did not insist on his rights
Applying the mind of Christ to our minds.
I think that if we concentrated on the differences in doctrine in a spirit of humility,
instead of becoming personal there would be a greater degree of charity amongst the 
brethren.


----------



## Jack K (Apr 29, 2014)

I suspect humility comes out when one brings a teachable attitude to the discussion. If I went into more discussions willing, even _expecting_ to learn from others wiser than myself, I would practice much more humility than I generally do.


----------



## Jash Comstock (Apr 29, 2014)

Jack K said:


> I suspect humility comes out when one brings a teachable attitude to the discussion. If I went into more discussions willing, even _expecting_ to learn from others wiser than myself, I would practice much more humility than I generally do.


That's a great point Jack. I know I myself tend to be pretty unteachable at times, and I know that contributes to my lack of humility


----------



## ZackF (Apr 29, 2014)

Jack K said:


> I suspect humility comes out when one brings a teachable attitude to the discussion. If I went into more discussions willing, even _expecting_ to learn from others wiser than myself, I would practice much more humility than I generally do.



or the possibility of learning from people beneath them in every way. Ala....Schaeffers "no little people." The more I go forward in life it seems humility is like mortar between other virtues. It can also be easily mimicked. One can't just be humble. Yesterdays newspaper has an cover article above the fold about our local Catholic diocese' new bishop. The title is "Bishop ready to serve diocese with humility." If that title reflects his words then the diocese is in trouble. Postmodernism is chalk full of humble-talk including Christianity's own Emergent Church. Bring up Calvinism online to one of these people, and their "epistemological humility" will be down for the count in no time. Humility is a disposition toward God and neighbor mostly. External behavior can demonstrate a lack of it but grasping behaviors to confirm it is difficult. It's seems negative behaviors are commended. "Don't pray on street corners," "Don't sound trumpets," "Don't let the left hand...," and so forth.


----------



## Wayne (Apr 29, 2014)

Schaeffer's debate with Bishop Pike would be an excellent case study.


----------



## VictorBravo (Apr 30, 2014)

Wayne said:


> Schaeffer's debate with Bishop Pike would be an excellent case study.



Yes, and another case study might be Jehu in 2 Kings 10.

He was all for showing off his zeal for the Lord. He was even rewarded for it. But in the end: 

"But Jehu took no heed to walk in the law of the LORD God of Israel with all his heart: for he departed not from the sins of Jeroboam, which made Israel to sin." 2Kings 10:31 

I often think of Jehu when I am tempted to show off for the Lord. Any debating technique that tends to glorify myself, even a little, is dangerous ground as far as I'm concerned.

That includes the technique of false humility....


----------



## Wayne (Apr 30, 2014)

The neat thing about the Schaeffer-Pike debate of course was that Schaeffer was more intent on winning Pike than on winning the debate.


----------



## earl40 (Apr 30, 2014)

Wayne said:


> Schaeffer's debate with Bishop Pike would be an excellent case study.



Is there a transscript or video of this?


----------



## Jash Comstock (Apr 30, 2014)

earl40 said:


> Wayne said:
> 
> 
> > Schaeffer's debate with Bishop Pike would be an excellent case study.
> ...


 
Yes I'm curious is well


----------



## earl40 (Apr 30, 2014)

We can try as hard as possible to come across as humble though when an essential is involved the person who holds contrary to this I have found is where Our Lord maxim holds in that they will hate you no matter how humble you are. I would enjoy seeing or reading if Schaefer was able to not be hated by Bishop Pike. I assume Pike was Roman Catholic?


----------



## ZackF (Apr 30, 2014)

earl40 said:


> We can try as hard as possible to come across as humble though when an essential is involved the person who holds contrary to this I have found is where Our Lord maxim holds in that they will hate you no matter how humble you are. I would enjoy seeing or reading if Schaefer was able to not be hated by Bishop Pike. I assume Pike was Roman Catholic?



If memory serves me Pike was an Anglican Bishop.


----------



## earl40 (Apr 30, 2014)

KS_Presby said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > We can try as hard as possible to come across as humble though when an essential is involved the person who holds contrary to this I have found is where Our Lord maxim holds in that they will hate you no matter how humble you are. I would enjoy seeing or reading if Schaefer was able to not be hated by Bishop Pike. I assume Pike was Roman Catholic?
> ...



As per my point if Pike was Anglican there may be warrant with a humble assumption of charity of him being a believer. Of course the subject of the debate would discern such. If he was a Romanist the ability to stay humble and not compromise essential doctrine would be very very hard. Most, if not all, who consciously reject The Gospel will take any act of true humility and judge our "boasting in The Lord" as an act of pride.


----------



## ZackF (Apr 30, 2014)

earl40 said:


> KS_Presby said:
> 
> 
> > earl40 said:
> ...



Pike was further from the Gospel than plumb line Rome. He advocated LSD use. From the accounts I've heard, Schaeffer refused debate generally. He strove to leave people an escape route.


----------



## ZackF (Apr 30, 2014)

KS_Presby said:


> earl40 said:
> 
> 
> > KS_Presby said:
> ...



.


----------



## earl40 (Apr 30, 2014)

I agree one can act humbly and graciously though those who disagree many times have "meltdowns" because they do not see through their bias and hatred of the messenger bringing The Good News.


----------



## whirlingmerc (May 1, 2014)

People have difficulty 'hearing' you if you come across to harsh. Always good to edit and rephrase and maybe shorten arguments.

It helps to find something you can agree with and appropriately compliment in good conscience


----------

