Appeal: steelman
From Jay Dyer vs Pedro from Crucible Debate: Sola Scriptura and Protestantism.
- #143029:09upheld Jay Dyer epainos: steelman (+1)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“Now again, I'm not trying to misrepresent my opponent's position, but at one point, and he can correct me if I misheard him when he gives his reply, but he did say something that sounded to me like Paul and Timothy, etc, weren't practicing sola scriptura.”
Diogenes: He flags the attribution as provisional and invites correction before building a rebuttal on it, rather than fixing a convenient version of the opponent's words.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Jay Dyer has consistently argued that sola scriptura as classically defined fails and that oral/written apostolic tradition is co-authoritative; this line is consistent with that stance and does not depart from it. The transcript confirms Pedro did say (in his opening) that those living alongside Paul, Peter and Timothy "were practicing sola scriptura. That was never the claim" — so Jay's paraphrase accurately captures Pedro's actual position, and he explicitly flags it as tentative and invites correction rather than asserting a fixed, uncharitable version, satisfying the accurate-and-charitable-restatement test before he builds his rebuttal on it.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "clarification", on the same ledger as the callout. Rather than assuming or asserting a claim about Pedro's position, Jay explicitly hedges ("something that sounded to me like") and invites correction ("he can correct me if I misheard him"). Checking the transcript, this matches what Pedro actually said in his opening ("were practicing sola scriptura. That was never the claim"), so the hedge is both charitable and accurate rather than a misrepresentation.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 has held since the opening that classical sola scriptura, as defined by the Reformed confessions, is internally inconsistent with the church's actual historical practice of authority; this line is a careful, accurate paraphrase of Pedro's own opening remark used to build that case, not a departure from his position. Jay Dyer's opening-statement framework was that classical sola scriptura is false and inconsistent with the historical record; here, before building his rebuttal about 2 Timothy 3:16, he accurately paraphrases Pedro's own opening-statement remark that during the apostolic period ('men carried along by the Holy Spirit... that was never the claim') sola scriptura wasn't being practiced, and explicitly invites correction if he misheard. This is an accurate, charitably-hedged restatement of the opponent's actual words used as the basis for a subsequent argument, which fits the steelman criterion.
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.