Appeal: false claim
From DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Pastor Jonathan Shelley | Tradition Vs Sola Scriptura.
- #23251:41:17overturned Jay Dyer claim: false claim (+1)
The council overturned the finding, so nothing is marked against Jay Dyer.
The claim, as Thucydides noted it: The church fathers described the inspiration of scripture as similar to the synergy of the two natures in Christ, with human authors cooperating with the Holy Spirit.
Diogenes: Thucydides (verifier): unsupported. I did not open a primary text in this check, so this rests on what I know of the fathers. Some fathers, such as Origen and Chrysostom, do compare Scripture to the incarnation. Many early fathers instead describe the human author as an instrument played by the Spirit, which is not a "synergy" of two natures. "All the church fathers" is therefore an overgeneralization, and the two-natures framing is a later, mostly modern Orthodox synthesis. The claim fits Jay Dyer's own Orthodox tradition, but he named no source, and the universal wording is not supported.- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Dyer opened by declaring that Scripture points beyond the text to oral tradition, that the Word is a divine person, and that the Bible is a created medium. He has held that throughout. The called line, on the incarnational analogy for inspiration, is consistent with that position and does not depart from it. The verifier opened no primary text. The verifier also grants that Origen and Chrysostom do draw the incarnational analogy, so the claim has patristic support and is not shown false. What the verifier shows is that the wording is loose. The phrase "all the church fathers" overgeneralizes, but that is a matter of degree. In the transcript Dyer states it as a general description of Orthodox teaching on inspiration. Whether it is false is a toss-up, so it is overturned.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. Jay answers a Q&A question about the nature of scripture by stating the Orthodox view: inspiration is a synergy of human and divine, like Christ's two natures. It is an exposition of his own position and fits his earlier claim that the Bible is created but inspired and inerrant. The patristic claim is general and cites no names, but he is describing his tradition in reply to a question, not relying on it against a live challenge. Nothing here is a fault or a merit.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Dyer declared at the opening that the Word is a divine person made known through written text and oral tradition, and that the Bible is a created medium. He has held that since, and this line applies it to inspiration without departing from it. Dyer's claim is a general statement about the fathers' view of inspiration. Some fathers do compare Scripture to the incarnation, with Origen and Chrysostom as examples, so it is not simply false. The verifier's finding is overgeneralization and no source named, and it rests on no primary text. Whether the claim is false is a toss-up, so I overturn.
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.