Appeal: direct answer
From Religion Debate: Islam vs Christianity.
- #11773:03:57upheld Ijaz Ahmad epainos: direct answer (+1)
The council upheld the call: Ijaz Ahmad earned 1 point.
“If it's indicator, we can indicate things but know the exact but not know the exact essence of them, which is why Allah establishes there is nothing absolutely like him, but he can indicate knowledge which is familiar to us.”
Diogenes: The follow-up question — whether uncreated things share communicable attributes with created things — goes to the heart of Sam's uncreated-Qur'an objection, and Ijaz answers it with the indication/essence distinction rather than calling it irrelevant; note the transcript mis-segments this reply into the host's block after "I'll turn that to Ajaz."- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Ijaz has held since the opening that Allah is absolutely one with attributes that are real but categorically unlike created attributes ("there is nothing like unto Him"), and this line applies that same indication/essence distinction to directly answer the specific epistemological question posed about uncreated things being knowable. The question asked exactly this: can uncreated attributes be known via shared communicable properties with created things, and Ijaz answers on point with the indication-without-essence distinction rather than deflecting or calling the question irrelevant, consistent with his stated Tawhid framework throughout.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "direct answer". A viewer had asked precisely whether uncreated things share communicable attributes with created things such that they can be known. Rather than deflecting, Ijaz gives a substantive theological answer on point: God's attributes are known through "indication" (a familiar, analogical signification) while His essence remains unlike anything created (citing the tanzih principle), which is a direct engagement with the question as posed rather than a dodge.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Ijaz has held since the opening that Allah is absolutely one, with attributes but "nothing like unto Him" (tanzih); this answer is consistent with that framework, not a departure, and it engages the specific question put rather than deflecting it. The transcript's speaker tag is a segmentation artifact — the host explicitly says "I'll turn that to Ajaz" and the very next words ("Allah establishes there is nothing absolutely like him") are unmistakably Ijaz's theological voice, not the host's — so the content is properly read as Ijaz's answer. The question asked whether uncreated and created things share communicable attributes enabling knowledge; Ijaz directly answers with an indication/essence distinction (we can know God's attributes indicatively, through familiar terms, without His essence being like created essence), which is an on-point, substantive answer rather than a dismissal of the question as irrelevant.
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.