Appeal: explicit argument
From Jay Dyer vs Pastor P Debate Orthodoxy vs Protestantism, Sola Scriptura and Church History.
- #127918:20upheld Jay Dyer epainos: explicit argument (+1)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“… if God cares about liturgy, which he certainly does by killing Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire, where is the New Testament presentation of how we are supposed to worship God?”
Diogenes: A clean argument from a premise his opponent accepts (God prescribes worship) to a gap in the written text, backed with datable citations — Justin Martyr c.150, Irenaeus c.180 — that the opponent can check and contest.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S0's declared opening method was to marshal biblical and patristic texts to show extra-biblical tradition is presupposed by scripture itself; this line is a direct execution of that declared method, not a departure from it. This line, delivered within S0's opening statement, presents a clear premise (God prescribes and cares about the manner of worship, evidenced by Nadab and Abihu) leading to a conclusion (the NT text alone cannot be the sole source, since it lacks a liturgy, so oral apostolic tradition must supply it), followed shortly by datable citations to Justin Martyr (c.150) and Irenaeus (c.180) that are checkable and were later engaged by the opponent. This is squarely an explicit argument with premises and conclusion, not mere assertion.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "explicit argument". Jay lays out premises plainly—God cares about the manner of worship (evidenced by the death of Nadab and Abihu for offering strange fire) and the New Testament nowhere spells out a liturgy—to draw the conclusion that apostolic liturgical tradition, not scripture alone, must supply the missing content. This is a clearly stated argument for his thesis that extra-biblical tradition is necessary, not mere assertion.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S0's opening thesis was that scripture itself points to necessary extra-biblical apostolic tradition, and this passage—part of that same opening statement—builds a premise-to-conclusion argument (God prescribes worship, yet no NT liturgy is given, therefore apostolic oral liturgical tradition must fill the gap) with datable patristic citations, fully consistent with that declared position. The line states a premise, draws an inference to a textual gap, and supports it with checkable citations (Justin Martyr c.150, Irenaeus c.180), satisfying the explicit argument criterion, and it sits squarely within the case he opened with.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.