Appeal: dodge
From Jay Dyer vs Pedro from Crucible Debate: Sola Scriptura and Protestantism.
- #15191:47:17upheld Pedro psogos: dodge (+2)
The council upheld the call: Pedro gave away 2 points.
“Well, you don't you don't how do I say this? There is a god, right, who maintains and creates everything. Right? That can be seen throughout general revelation without the bible.”
Diogenes: The mechanism question has now been put across the whole debate — in cross, in closing and twice in Q&A — and he moves to general revelation, which establishes a creator but says nothing about which books are canonical; Jay names it: "You never answered what is pre scriptural, an epistemic question about how you know."Herodotus (unknown): This is a first and, so far, only meeting between the two: Jay Dyer has debated 24 opponents on this site but never Pedro before, and Pedro's entire recorded history here is this single "Is Sola Scriptura True?" bout with Dyer (aired via Jay's Analysis / The Crucible, ~Oct 2021). No independent web record surfaces any prior Pedro–Dyer exchange, so there is no cross-debate track record of dodging to corroborate a "pattern" — the callout stands or falls purely on this transcript's repeated mechanism question, not on history between these two speakers. Sources: https://jaysanalysis.com/protestant-vs-orthodox-debate-is-sola-scriptura-true-jay-dyer-vs-pedro/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6GSc9r9_q7w https://jaydyer.substack.com/p/protestant-vs-orthodox-debate-is-8d8
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Pedro's opening and standing position was that the infallible canon rests in "the purposes and will of God" rather than any historical, checkable mechanism, and here he restates that same evasion under a new label ("general revelation") rather than answering the specific historical-mechanism question that was put to him multiple times. The "mechanism" question — how the canon specifically is known — was put repeatedly across the debate (cross-examination at 44:03, 62:39–65:57, closing, and again twice in Q&A), and Pedro's answer here retreats to general revelation, which at most establishes that a creator-god exists, not which books belong in the canon; it does not touch the epistemic question asked. Jay names the non-response directly and accurately in the same breath: "You're avoiding the question... you never answered what is pre-scriptural, an epistemic question about how you know," and the pattern continues afterward (Pedro's answer folds back into special/scriptural revelation moments later, which Jay flags as circular).
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "dodge". Jay's question here is specifically about the epistemic origin of Pedro's claims about God's will/purpose for him — asked at "Is the origin of that knowledge?" and, when Pedro answered only about God's bare existence, repeated explicitly ("you never answered what is prescriptural, an epistemic question about how you know"). Pedro's answer here again only re-asserts that general revelation shows a god "who maintains and creates everything," addressing the easier question of mere existence rather than the specific question of how he knows God's will/purpose for him, which Jay had by now asked twice without a direct answer.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Pedro's position of record is that the canon's identity rests in God's sovereign will/decree rather than a checkable church criterion; when pressed on how he accesses that will apart from scripture (the very content in question), he retreats to general revelation, which he himself later cannot sustain (he subsequently concedes at 131:19 he needs to "review the tape"), confirming this was an evasion of the specific epistemic question rather than an answer to it. Jay's question "what is the mechanism in history that you appeal to to know the canon?" (and its restatement, "what is prescriptural, an epistemic question about how you know") is the same specific challenge pressed repeatedly across the cross-examination (c. 62:41-66:00) and again here; Pedro's answer moves to general revelation, which at most establishes bare theism and says nothing about which books are canonical — the actual question asked. This is a direct question, asked more than twice across the debate, left unanswered at the moment it is called.
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.