Appeal: concession
From Jay Dyer vs 2 Freemason Christians.
- #12241:12:05upheld Chase Geyser epainos: concession (+1)
The council upheld the call: Chase Geyser earned 1 point.
“I see what you're saying, Jay. There there are certainly elements of Freemasonry that are derived from religion.”
Diogenes: He grants the point about the lodge's religious furniture and symbolism instead of insisting on the flat "not religious" line, while maintaining the distinction he wants between borrowed symbols and a religion.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: Consistent with S3's pattern of candid concessions throughout this debate (dogma exists, Kabbalah elements present); this is a further honest admission, not a departure from his overall thesis. Chase explicitly grants that Freemasonry contains elements derived from religion (temple symbolism, Solomon's Temple, etc.) rather than insisting on a flat denial, a genuine concession even as he maintains his distinction between borrowed symbols and being a religion.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "concession". Pressed on the Old Testament temple imagery (Jacob and Boaz, Solomon's Temple) pervading Masonic lodges, Geyser directly concedes that elements of Freemasonry are indeed derived from religion, rather than continuing to insist the lodge is purely secular/philosophical.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S3's position has held that Masonry is philosophy/fraternity rather than religion; here he grants that specific elements (Solomon's temple symbolism, Jacob and Boaz) are derived from religion, rather than denying it, while attempting to preserve the distinction between borrowed symbols and being a religion. This is a genuine concession of the specific factual point about religious derivation of Masonic symbolism, made directly rather than through evasive denial.
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.