Appeal: dodge
From Fr. Ananias and Jay Dyer vs Matt Slick: Orthodoxy vs Protestantism Debate.
- #257653:32overturned Matt Slick psogos: dodge (+2)
The council overturned the call, so no points were given away.
“The holy spirit bore witness just like you said…”
Diogenes: Asked again "how did you know what books are?", Slick answered with his own conversion testimony, a circle of the Spirit's witness, and went back to "Show me from scripture", leaving the canon question unanswered above the threshold after it had been put many times.major: The canon question has been put repeatedly and goes to the base of his case, but he did offer a ground this time, even if it is below the threshold, and I am keeping it at the grade of the earlier dodge.
Herodotus (partly): I found no earlier debates between Slick and Ananias. Only promotional Substack listings for this same event turned up, and they are written from the Orthodox side. In the transcript, Slick was asked "how did you know what books are?" at about 53:27. He answered with his conversion testimony and the Spirit's witness, which the referee calls circular. He then went back to "Show me from scripture." At 54:29 he did say how he knows: "the testimony of the holy spirit within me." At 7:27 he also gave a principled answer, that God's sovereignty preserved the Scriptures. So this is a thin answer that Ananias rejected, not pure evasion, and "major" may be too severe. The record also shows Slick being repeatedly interrupted and Jay Dyer opening with insults. Sources: https://jaydyer.substack.com/p/apologist-matt-slick-vs-fr-deacon-a85
- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Slick declared at the opening that Scripture is the inspired word and the standard, and he has held since that he knows it by the Spirit's inner witness and God's sovereign preservation; the called line restates that and does not depart from it. A dodge needs a question put twice and still unanswered. Slick did answer: at 7:40 he cited God's sovereign preservation, at 13:04 the Spirit's inner witness, and at 53:00 and 54:29 his conversion testimony. That answer is a bare circle, but he gave it, and Ananias rejected it. His return to "show me from scripture" repeats a stance he has held since the opening. A weak answer is not a refusal to answer, so the dodge label does not fit.
- Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. Slick restates his stated ground, the Spirit's inner witness, and notes that Ananias gave the same cause. That repeats his position from 13:04 and is not a new move. It is a parity point attached to an answer he did give, so it is not tu quoque. The ground is circular and sits below the threshold, but nothing here is a separate fault to call.
- Plato overturn: On the record: Slick declared at the opening a very high view of Scripture as the inspired word of God and the standard, and has held throughout that he knows the canon by the Spirit's witness and need not justify it further; the called line is that same answer, not a departure. A dodge needs a question put twice and still unanswered. Slick answered it each time: the Spirit's witness (13:04, 53:00, 54:29), God's sovereign preservation of the text (7:27), and his conversion testimony. Ananias rejected these as circular, and the rubric would rank them below the threshold, but that makes them an answer that scores nothing, not a refusal. Slick also never refused the question. He restated his position and asked for Scripture in return. The call is overturned.
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.