Appeal: direct answer
From Jay Dyer vs Pastor P Debate Orthodoxy vs Protestantism, Sola Scriptura and Church History.
- #131736:43upheld Jay Dyer epainos: direct answer (+1)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“Not arbitrary because I believe in tradition, and I cited the example liturgy as an apostolic tradition.”
Diogenes: The arbitrariness charge is turned back on him and he answers it head-on by naming the criterion his own framework supplies, rather than deflecting.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Jay Dyer has held since his opening statement that apostolic liturgical tradition (handed down orally, evidenced in the early fathers) governs church practice including the relative weight given to texts in worship; this line restates and applies that same standing thesis to rebut the arbitrariness charge, and does not depart from it. Pastor P's charge ("you are arbitrarily choosing a portion of the Bible to be more important") is answered head-on: Jay names the criterion — apostolic liturgical tradition, which he had argued at length in his opening and reasserted throughout (Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, the Ephesus lineage) — as the non-arbitrary basis for the gospels' primacy. This is a genuine answer tied to a standing, previously-argued position, not a bare assertion or deflection.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "direct answer". Pastor P had just charged that Jay arbitrarily elevates the gospels/liturgy above the rest of scripture; Jay directly answers the "arbitrary" charge by giving a reason - that this rests on the specific historical claim, already argued in his opening statement with citations to Justin Martyr and Irenaeus, that the liturgy is an apostolic tradition handed down alongside the text. It is a brief answer, but it points back to a real argument with evidence rather than a bare assertion, so it is not begging the question in the way Pastor P's parallel "I believe God blessed it" answers were.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Jay Dyer has held since his opening statement that apostolic oral/liturgical tradition is a non-arbitrary, historically identifiable criterion supplementing scripture, and this line applies that same standing criterion directly to the arbitrariness charge just put to him. S0's declared framework since the opening is that apostolic liturgical tradition (handed down orally, not in written scripture) is a real, historically-groundable criterion distinguishing the Gospels' liturgical centrality; when charged with arbitrariness he points directly to that named criterion rather than deflecting or restating a bare assertion. This is a genuine, on-point answer to the specific charge just leveled, consistent with the position he has held throughout (see also 41:52, 81:53, 85:14 where the same tradition-as-mechanism argument is credited).
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.