Appeal: clarification
From FULL SAVAGE DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Indiana Brunner: Protestant Bible Wrong???.
- #5694:58upheld Indiana Brunner epainos: clarification (+1)
The council upheld the call: Indiana Brunner earned 1 point.
“… is there a distinction between, you know, what Catholics believe about relics versus what orthodox believe about relics?”
Diogenes: Rather than assuming the Orthodox position matches the Catholic one he is familiar with, he asks his opponent to state the difference first.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: S1 opened by admitting he is unfamiliar with the Orthodox/Catholic distinction on relics and focuses mainly on Catholicism; this line is consistent with that stated position, asking S0 to clarify rather than assuming the two traditions are identical. The quote is a direct request for a definition/distinction before proceeding, exactly matching the "clarification" criterion, and it is consistent with S1's stated unfamiliarity with Orthodoxy voiced moments earlier in the transcript.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "clarification". Rather than assuming Catholic and Orthodox views on relics are identical, S1 explicitly asks Jay to distinguish the two positions before engaging further, which Jay then does (uncreated vs. created grace). This is a genuine request for definition before argument.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S1 opened by disclaiming deep familiarity with Orthodoxy specifically (as opposed to Catholicism); this question is consistent with that stated position and not a departure from it. This is a textbook clarification: S1, having just admitted he mostly knows Catholicism and not Orthodoxy, asks S0 to state the distinction between the two traditions' views on relics before proceeding, rather than assuming the Orthodox position mirrors the Catholic one.
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.