Appeal: dodge
From DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Pastor Jonathan Shelley | Tradition Vs Sola Scriptura.
- #229653:16upheld Jonathan Shelley psogos: dodge (+1) tempered from major to minor
The council upheld the call: Jonathan Shelley gave away 1 point.
“Why does it matter who I could point to?”
Diogenes: Jay asked twice (53:01, 53:08) for a Christian in the first three centuries who held Shelley's canon. Shelley answers "Doesn't matter" and then asks why it matters, though he himself cited historical reception by all Christians as a test of canonicity.minor: The question bears directly on the central canon dispute and Shelley's own reception criterion, and he declines it without naming a framework objection.
The bench graded it minor (Aristotle, Plato); the referee had major.
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Shelley opened by declaring Christ the infallible head and final authority, with Scripture as his word, self-authenticating by its divine voice, and has held that throughout; the called line refuses to name a pre-Nicene witness, which fits his claim that Scripture's canon does not depend on who recognized it, though he also cited reception by Christians as a test. Dyer asked at 53:01 and again at 53:08 for someone in the first three centuries with Shelley's canon. Shelley answered "Doesn't matter" and then "Why does it matter who I could point to?" and never named anyone. He had earlier offered historical reception as a test of canonicity, so the question bore on his own framework. His reply is a counter-question with no answer, and it came after the question was put twice. This is not a framework objection, because he did not name a presupposition he denies or say what must be settled first. He does give a ground elsewhere, "Scripture is self-authenticating", but that is not a reply to this question. The call stands as a dodge.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. "Why does it matter who I could point to?" is a counter-question, but it follows his stated position that scripture is scripture whether or not anyone could identify it (52:59). He also named Jerome and Athanasius later, so the question was not left wholly unanswered. Whether this counts as a dodge or a framework objection is a toss-up, so I call nothing.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Shelley declared at the opening that Christ is the final authority, that his word is infallible and that Scripture is that word, and he has held that Scripture is self-authenticating; the called line holds to that position, though it refuses a direct question. Jay asked twice (53:01, 53:08) for someone in the first three centuries who held the Protestant canon. Shelley answered "Doesn't matter" and then "Why does it matter who I could point to?", and gave no name. He had put historical reception by Christians forward as a test of canonicity, so the question bears on his own criterion. He also made no framework objection of the kind the rubric allows: he did not name a presupposition he denies or say what must be settled first. A question put twice and left unanswered meets the dodge elements.
- Thesmothetes uphold: By the rule: every element of the label is found in the record. Jay put the direct question at 53:01 ("name somebody in the first three centuries that had your canon") and again at 53:08. Shelley answered "Doesn't matter" and then "Why does it matter who I could point to?", which is a counter-question and names no one. It is not a framework objection, because he never said what must be settled first. His claim at 52:59 that scripture is scripture whoever could identify it is a bare circle, and it is not an answer to who held the canon. The question also bore on his own test of historical reception, and later he named only Jerome and Athanasius, neither from the first three centuries. Since the record bears out the remark, the lower severity fits.
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.