Appeal: ad hominem
From Fr. Ananias and Jay Dyer vs Matt Slick: Orthodoxy vs Protestantism Debate.
- #25861:21:22upheld Matt Slick psogos: ad hominem (+1) tempered from flagrant to minor
The council upheld the call: Matt Slick gave away 1 point.
“I believe this because you're afraid. I honestly do believe that…”
Diogenes: Slick repeated the motive charge (fear) after S3 had given a stated reason and had cited John 21:25, 1 Timothy 3:15 and 2 Thessalonians 2:15. Slick also said S3 took 2 Thessalonians "out of context" without giving the context, and called him "rude" and "so full of it".minor: It repeats the same motive attack from #2585 after the reason was given, and the charge of fear is contradicted by S3's citing of Scripture just before.
Herodotus (partly): The web search found no earlier debate between Matt Slick and Fr. Ananias, and the site has no prior record for Slick (0 debates). The history therefore can't show a pattern. The transcript does show the charge is not new within this debate. At 76:25 Slick said Ananias was "afraid of the word of God because he's not regenerate". He repeated it at 81:21. Context that tempers the severity: Jay Dyer opened the debate with abuse at 0:33–0:42 ("cult", "goblin, a demon, a boomer tard"). Ananias had answered the fear charge (77:55 "not because I'm afraid of scripture") and said he was declining on strategic grounds. Slick did partly keep a legitimate point, which was that Ananias cited verses without letting them be examined. The mind-reading of motive stands as ad hominem, and Slick repeated it after being answered. Sources: https://jaydyer.substack.com/p/protestant-vs-orthodox-debate-is-8d8 The bench graded it major (Plato); the referee had flagrant.
- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Slick declared at the opening that Scripture is the inspired standard, that Calvinism is what it teaches, and that Orthodox synergism damns. He has held this throughout. Imputing fear to Fr. Ananias as his motive for declining to examine Colossians goes beyond that stance. All elements are met. The remark is about the person's motive, and it is offered in place of a reply to Ananias's stated reason (the principles must be settled first). Ananias had already denied the charge at 77:55, and nothing in the record backs it. It also turns the exchange to the person. Slick's complaint that verses were cited and not examined is a fair point, but it is a different point from this line. The line repeats the charge from 76:25, which I upheld. Because Slick was provoked by Jay's abuse and the charge is mind-reading rather than a slur, the severity should be lowered from flagrant to minor.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "ad hominem". Ananias had given a stated reason for not going to exegesis: the canon and the hermeneutic are in dispute, so the principle must be settled first. He had also just cited 1 Tim 3:15, Jn 21:25 and 2 Thess 2:15. Slick does not meet that reason. He attributes the refusal to fear, a motive nothing in the debate backs, and the remark closes the question rather than inviting further examination. The hedge "maybe I'm wrong" does not change that.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Slick declared at the opening a very high view of Scripture as the inspired standard, that Orthodox synergism damns, and that he need not justify the canon; he has held that throughout, and the called line repeats his motive charge (fear of God's word) rather than departing from his stance. Slick's "I believe this because you're afraid" repeats the motive charge from 76:25 after Ananias gave a stated reason (strategic, principle-level) and denied fear at 77:55. It substitutes mind-reading for answering the cited verses (John 21:25, 1 Tim 3:15, 2 Thess 2:15). The charge is untrue by the record, irrelevant to the exegesis, and closes the exchange on the person. All elements are met. Flagrant is too high, because Slick kept a partly legitimate complaint that the verses were cited without cross-examination, and Dyer's abuse set a hostile tone. Minor to major fits better.
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.