Appeal: bare assertion
From DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Pastor Jonathan Shelley | Tradition Vs Sola Scriptura.
- #23172:03:56overturned Jay Dyer psogos: bare assertion (+2)
The council overturned the call, so no points were given away.
“Yes. They were. With icons? Yes. You can read the scholarship on it.”
Diogenes: Asked whether first-century house churches held liturgical services, Jay says yes, with icons, and points to unnamed "scholarship". The only concrete reference he gives is Dura-Europos, which is third-century, so nothing offered supports first-century icons or liturgy, and he relies on it as proof that Orthodox practice is apostolic.major: The claim is contested, nothing checkable is given for the first-century date, and it supports his main claim that Orthodox worship is apostolic, though Shelley's own challenge was loose.
- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Dyer opened by declaring that Scripture points beyond the text to oral tradition and that Orthodox liturgical and ecclesial practice rests on apostolic tradition, and he has held that throughout. This line asserts early liturgy and icons, which is consistent with that position and does not depart from it. Dyer did offer something for the claim. He pointed to scholarship, named the Dura-Europos synagogue in the next breath, and cited Protestant and Anglican liturgical scholars right after. He also gave Michael Garden's book on early icons and the catacombs earlier in the debate. That is thin, but it is not nothing. Dura-Europos is third-century, so it does not show first-century icons, which is a weakness in the evidence. Because he offered some evidence, it is not clear that every element of bare assertion is met. The call is overturned.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "bare assertion". Asked whether first-century house churches had liturgy with icons, Jay says "Yes" and "You can read the scholarship on it," and names no author or work. Dura-Europos at 124:00 is a vague gesture that comes after the line, and the claim is contested and then relied on. The unnamed scholarship is a pointer to evidence and not evidence, so this is a bare assertion.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Dyer declared at the opening that Scripture points beyond itself to oral tradition and that Shelley has no basis for the Protestant canon, and he has held that throughout; the called line applies his tradition-based case to liturgy and icons, so it fits his position rather than departing from it. Dyer offered something checkable: "you can read the scholarship," then Dura-Europos, and earlier he cited the Apostolic Fathers and Michael Garden on icons. A pointer to scholarship and a named site is not nothing offered. Whether it supports first-century icons is arguable, and that goes to the weight of the evidence. Given the close call on whether the elements are present, the call is overturned.
- Thesmothetes overturn: By the rule: an element of the label is missing from the record. Bare assertion needs a claim with nothing offered for it. Jay pointed to scholarship, named the Dura-Europos synagogue in the next breath, and cited Protestant and Anglican liturgical scholars right after. Earlier he gave Michael Garden's book on early icons and the catacombs, and the Apostolic Fathers on liturgy. That evidence is thin, and Dura-Europos is third-century, but its weight is arguable and it is not nothing. The "nothing offered" element is therefore missing.
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.