Appeal: direct answer
From HEATED DEBATE: Jay Dyer Vs Jake Muslim Metaphysician | Trinity Vs Tawhid -Modern Day Debate.
- #7061:45:50upheld Jay Dyer epainos: direct answer (+1)
The council upheld the call: Jay Dyer earned 1 point.
“… we don't automatically think that if somebody got something wrong, they're necessarily a heretic. I mean, Augustine made Augustine made many mistakes... When it becomes known as a heresy. Yes... That's what councils are for.”
Diogenes: He answers the "heretical saints" charge with a stated mechanism — conciliar definition marking when a view becomes heresy — rather than denying the awkward premises, and accepts the hard cases of Justin and Augustine.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Dyer's standing method throughout the debate is to answer with a specific distinguishing criterion rather than a flat denial; here he offers the standing Orthodox criterion (heresy is formally determined by councils, not every mistaken belief) to explain how praying to a saint who held an erroneous view is not thereby "praying to a heretic.". Pressed on whether venerating Justin Martyr and Augustine amounts to praying to heretics, Dyer gives a substantive, checkable criterion — a belief becomes formal heresy only upon conciliar condemnation — engaging the actual question rather than dodging it, which is a genuine direct answer.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "clarification", on the same ledger as the callout. Pressed on the apparent inconsistency of venerating fathers (like Justin Martyr) who held views later judged wrong, Jay draws the standard distinction between holding an imprecise or mistaken view before a doctrine was conciliarly defined and being a formal heretic (a status he ties explicitly to conciliar condemnation), which addresses rather than dodges the charge Jake is pressing.
- Plato uphold: On the record: Jay has consistently appealed to conciliar authority as the mechanism for doctrinal definition throughout the debate (echoing the "unbroken history/councils" pattern noted generally for his tradition); here, pressed repeatedly on whether Justin's and Augustine's errors make them heretics, he gives that same mechanism directly — a view is heresy once a council so defines it — rather than dodging or denying the premise. Jake pressed the same question multiple times ("is it heretical?"), and Jay ultimately gives a specific, checkable criterion (conciliar definition) rather than an evasive answer, which is a genuine direct answer consistent with his broader appeal to councils throughout the debate.
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.