Appeal: clarification
From HEATED DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Jake Muslim Metaphysician | Trinity Vs Tawhid -Modern Day Debate.
- #66946:00upheld Jay Dyer epainos: clarification (+1)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“I didn't claim that that those Jewish theologians taught the Trinity... I said that they talked about the reality of multiple hypostasis... I just simply pointed out that early Judaism was not monolithic, and that was enough to demonstrate that you couldn't use the argument... that the Old Testament was, quote, unitarian…”
Diogenes: He states precisely what his use of Boyarin and Segal was and was not meant to establish, narrowing the claim to what the evidence supports instead of defending the stronger version attributed to him.- Aristotle overturn: On the record: Jay's opening statement already framed his Logos/Boyarin material narrowly (that early Judaism was not monolithic and included proto-binitarian speculation), and this line restates that same narrow claim in response to Jake's mischaracterization of it as a claim that ancient Jews were Trinitarians. "Clarification" requires asking for a definition or clarification instead of assuming; here Jay is not asking anything, he is asserting and defending what his own prior claim was and was not, correcting a mischaracterization. That is better captured, if anything, as part of his explicit argument restating his thesis and evidence, not the clarification move as defined.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "direct answer", on the same ledger as the callout. Jake's opening attributed to Jay the claim that ancient Jews were Trinitarians; Jay directly corrects this, clarifying his actual (more modest) claim — that Boyarin and Segal show early Judaism had currents positing multiple divine hypostases, which is enough to refute the narrower claim that the Old Testament was strictly unitarian, without asserting those Jews held Nicene Trinitarianism. This matches how Jay consistently frames the point later in the same debate (citing Boyarin on Christianity as a "conservative form of Judaism").
- Plato uphold: On the record: Jake's opening attributed to Jay the claim that "ancient Jews were Trinitarians," citing Segal and Boyarin; Jay's declared use of those sources (per this rebuttal) was only to show early Judaism was not monolithically unitarian, and this line is him correcting that specific misattribution, holding to the narrower claim rather than the stronger one Jake assigned him. The label "clarification" is imprecise since Jay is not asking for a definition but correcting a misattributed claim; the substance is better described as a direct answer/explicit correction of the record (I said X, not Y, and X was sufficient to refute Daniel's unitarian-Judaism claim), which is still a legitimate philosopher-grade move worth crediting.
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.