Appeal: fallacy spotted
From DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Pastor Jonathan Shelley | Tradition Vs Sola Scriptura.
- #229028:49upheld Jay Dyer epainos: fallacy spotted (+1) tempered from major to minor
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“… you keep equivocating because you think that every time it says word of God, it's only written, and I'm showing you that there's two mediums of word of God.”
Diogenes: Jay correctly diagnoses that Shelley slides between the Word as eternal person and the written text, and he restates his own distinction between an oral medium and a written medium of the word of God.minor: The diagnosis fits what Shelley said at 14:44–14:56 and 27:15, and it bears on the central dispute over what counts as the word of God.
The bench graded it minor (Aristotle, Plato); the referee had major.
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Dyer opened by declaring that the Word is a divine person who makes himself known through both written text and oral tradition, and he has held that throughout; this line charges Shelley with equivocating on "word of God", which is consistent with that position. The fault is in what Shelley actually said. At 27:23 he cited 1 Peter 1:25, "the word of the Lord endureth forever", to treat the written Bible as eternal. At 33:25 he said the Bible "is eternal". Both runs the eternal Word and the written text together. He also denied at 26:39 that oral teaching is called the word of God, so he assumed every instance of "word of God" means the written text. Dyer names that slide accurately and states the distinction he is drawing between the two.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "fallacy spotted". Jay says Shelley slides on "word of God", treating every use as the written text. This fits the record. Shelley's opening moved from the eternal Word of John 1 to "therefore we appeal to scripture as infallible". Later he argued that 1 Peter 1:25 means only Scripture, and he conceded the word can have "different contexts". Jay's gloss, "two mediums" (oral and written), is looser than the person-versus-text split that Shelley actually blurred. Even so, he names a real slide in what Shelley said. It is minor.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Dyer declared at the opening that the Word is a divine person who is made known through both written text and oral tradition, and he has held that throughout; this line restates it and applies it to Shelley's use of "word of God". The fault is in what Shelley actually said. He argued from "the word was God" and "the word of the Lord endures forever" (1 Peter 1:25) to the claim that the written Bible is eternal, and he treated every "word of God" as meaning written scripture. That slides between the person and the text. Dyer names the slide and gives the distinction that dissolves it. Shelley's denials at 24:43 and 26:39 that oral teaching is the word of God support the diagnosis. The call fits the elements, but it is a modest point, so the severity is better at minor.
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.