Appeal: tu quoque
From Jay Dyer vs Pastor P Debate Orthodoxy vs Protestantism, Sola Scriptura and Church History.
- #133342:33upheld Pastor P psogos: tu quoque (+2)
The council upheld the call: Pastor P gave away 2 points.
“… as far as the Council of Carthage, you keep going back to that and I'm I'm almost sorry because it's it's because it's what you it's an arbitrary choice for you that that's the one that's right.”
Diogenes: He turns the arbitrariness charge back on an opponent who has said he accepts Carthage entire and as reaffirmed at Trullo and Nicaea II, while it is his own position that keeps one canon of that council and discards the rest — and it still leaves the question unanswered.Herodotus (unknown): Site records show Pastor P has exactly one debate logged here — this one — and web search turns up no other encounter between Jay Dyer and Pastor P beyond this single "Bible Alone?" sola scriptura debate, which was simply re-posted across several platforms (Spreaker, YouTube, Substack) rather than repeated live. Jay Dyer has a long track record on this site (24 debates, heavy ad hominem/misrepresentation faults) but none of that history involves Pastor P specifically, so there is no established pattern between these two speakers to weigh — the tu quoque callout must be judged solely on this single exchange, not on any prior dynamic. Sources: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5I7e9XmpovU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CVnGaWrfIx8 https://jaydyer.substack.com/p/jay-dyer-debate-vs-pastor-p-bible-ff9 https://www.spreaker.com/episode/jay-dyer-debate-vs-pastor-p-bible-alone--52036566
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Pastor P's declared position throughout is that he accepts Carthage's ruling on the New Testament canon while rejecting its Old Testament/Deuterocanon ruling, and when repeatedly pressed on why this selective acceptance is not arbitrary, this line deflects the charge back onto Jay rather than answering it. The transcript confirms Jay had explicitly disclaimed picking and choosing, stating he accepts Carthage's ruling in its totality as reaffirmed at Trullo and Nicaea II, while Pastor P himself had just conceded he accepts Carthage's New Testament list but not its Deuterocanon ruling; rather than supplying the non-arbitrary principle Jay was demanding, Pastor P answers the charge of arbitrariness by asserting, without support, that Jay's own choice is equally arbitrary — a textbook "you too" deflection that leaves the original question unanswered.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "dodge", on the same ledger as the callout. By this point Jay has already asked several times, in several forms, why Carthage's canon decision should be trusted (e.g. "Why one that the church got it is Carthage right?" and "why should we follow that when you reject everything else that Carthage says?"). Rather than offering a principled answer here, Pastor P expresses weariness at the repetition ("you keep going back to that... I'm almost sorry") and then simply restates the bare assertion "the church gets it right sometimes" — a continuation of the same non-answer rather than a new response to the standing question.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Pastor P has held since early in the exchange (34:26 onward) that he accepts Carthage's NT decision while rejecting its deuterocanonical OT canon, without ever supplying a non-circular principle for the split; this line continues that unresolved pattern by deflecting the arbitrariness charge onto Jay rather than finally answering it. Rather than answering Jay's repeated, still-unanswered question (why trust Carthage's New Testament list while rejecting its Old Testament/deuterocanon and other rulings), Pastor P deflects by accusing Jay of the same arbitrariness he's been charged with. But the transcript shows this doesn't land: Jay has explicitly stated he accepts Carthage "in its totality," as reaffirmed at Trullo and Nicaea II, including the deuterocanon — he is not the one picking and choosing from that council. It is Pastor P's own stated position (34:38-45) that keeps Carthage's NT list while discarding its OT canon. Turning the charge back on an opponent who has disclaimed the very fault, instead of answering it, is a textbook tu quoque.
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.