Appeal: non sequitur

From Plagues, Popes & Pandemonium! OPEN DEBATE! Geopolitics, Conspiracy, Theology, Film! 2026-10-05 17:50.

• #22622:22:25upheld Fr. Ananias psogos: non sequitur (+2)
  The council upheld the call, but nothing on this stream goes on anyone’s record.
  “Every Protestant holds to some form of some form of penal substitution or atonement. So that means every Protestant is either a Nestorian or Anti Trinitarian. Implicitly. So I'd say we don't even worship the same god like you have a different Jesus.”
  Diogenes: From the premise that Protestants hold penal substitution, Fr. Ananias draws "so that means" they are Nestorian or anti-Trinitarian and worship a different God, but no premise linking the atonement theory to a division of Christ's person or of the Trinity is ever stated, even when Trap asked "why you think that", when he only repeated the conclusion.

  major: The inference carries the whole charge that Protestants worship a different God, and it was restated rather than supported when the caller asked for the grounds.

  • Aristotle uphold: On the record: Fr. Ananias joined as an Orthodox-sympathetic caller agreeing with Jay Dyer's anti-Rome and anti-Protestant stance, with no separate thesis; the called line is consistent with that stance and does not depart from it. The argument runs: Protestants hold penal substitution, so they are Nestorian or anti-Trinitarian, so they have a different Jesus. No premise links the atonement theory to dividing Christ's person or the Trinity. Ananias states none, and when Trap asks why, Jay Dyer answers with analogies and another assertion of the conclusion. The conclusion does not follow from the stated premise, and the missing premise is not supplied, so non sequitur holds. The universal "every Protestant" is a separate contested claim, but it is not what this label scores.
  • Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "bare assertion", on the same ledger as the callout. Fr. Ananias says every Protestant holds penal substitution. He then says this makes every Protestant "implicitly" Nestorian or anti-Trinitarian, and so worshipping a different God. He gives no reason, source or link for any of it. Trap disputes it ("I don't understand why"), and Fr. Ananias keeps relying on the claim ("wrong Trinity", "different Jesus") without ever supporting it.
  • Plato uphold: On the record: Fr. Ananias joined as a co-host-style speaker with no thesis of his own, echoing Jay Dyer's Orthodox polemic against rival Christian groups; the called line is a sweeping inference from penal substitution to Nestorianism or anti-Trinitarianism, in keeping with that polemic. He moves from "Protestants hold penal substitution" to "so every Protestant is Nestorian or anti-Trinitarian" and "a different God" with no premise linking the two. When Trap asked why he thought that, he repeated the conclusion. The link is left unstated, and I will not supply it for him. The jump from atonement theory to the person of Christ and the Trinity is a clear non sequitur.

  The bench voted on this, and its verdict is kept as it was given. It does not vote on the calls of a call-in show now, and nothing there counts on anybody’s record.

  Judged on 2026-10-05 under rules 3fcdc91a53f9, since revisedAppeal this callout

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.