Appeal: explicit argument
From Religion Debate: Islam vs Christianity.
- #107310:33upheld Daniel Haqiqatjou epainos: explicit argument (+1)
The council upheld the call: Daniel Haqiqatjou earned 1 point.
“The father is god, the son is god, the holy spirit is god. It's all one god, but the father is not the son, the son is not the father, and neither of them are the holy spirit. This is a logical contradiction.”
Diogenes: He lays out the premises and the alleged contradiction plainly and states exactly what the other side must do to answer it, rather than merely asserting polytheism.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S2 opened by declaring Islam strictly monotheistic and the Trinity either contradictory or polytheistic, and has held this position throughout the debate; this quoted line is the founding statement of that very thesis, not a departure from it. This is the core syllogism of S2's opening statement, stated with explicit premises (Father=God, Son=God, Spirit=God; Father≠Son≠Spirit) and an explicit conclusion (contradiction), plus a direct challenge to the opponents to resolve it. This is a clean instance of premises-and-conclusion argument, not mere assertion or insult.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "explicit argument". Daniel states his premises plainly (Father is God, Son is God, Spirit is God, yet Father≠Son≠Spirit) and draws an explicit conclusion (this is a logical contradiction, resolvable only by admitting three gods), then poses a direct challenge to the opposing side to resolve it. This is a clean statement of premises and conclusion, not an insult or rhetorical substitute, and it set the terms that both sides continued to contest for the rest of the debate.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S2 opened by declaring Islam strictly monotheistic and the Trinity a logical contradiction/polytheism, challenging Christians to resolve it "in a way a layperson can understand"; this quote is that very opening thesis restated with its premises spelled out, consistent with his position throughout. The quote plainly states premises (Father is God, Son is God, Spirit is God; Father≠Son≠Spirit) and a stated conclusion (logical contradiction), which is a textbook explicit argument and matches the framework he set at the opening.
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.