[tacticalogic]

whereas the "A" students would spot the trap and throw it back into the professor's face, thusly:

They claimed it was "self-evident," thus requiring no Scriptural support.

And the professor would throw it right back at them noting that there is nothing that precludes a "self evident truth" from being supported by the scriptures.

[Hebrews 11:6]

Do you think they should have supported it with Scriture, rather than claiming their justification was self-evident? Why do you suppose they acted as they did? You don't suppose it was because there actually is no Scriptural support, do you?