I've been giving this some thought, and I've wondered why more people aren't deists? Everyone wants a god who intervenes, cares about them, watches over them, rewards them with heaven. But yet there's no evidence to support any theistic perspective. And, in fact, all of the very best arguments for the existence of god that theists have come up with (and there are some good ones) point only to deism and never directly support any theistic point of view. So what's wrong with deism? Sure, let's say there's a god but he doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen. In fact, isn't this consistent with the history of mankind anyway? If there's really an intervening and caring god, why the Nazis, Pol Pot, and Stalin? Doesn't reality square much better with the notion of a god who is really unconcerned about us all?

Your thoughts, from any perspective, are appreciated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

If there's really an intervening and caring god, why the Nazis, Pol Pot, and Stalin?

---

If there is not an intervening and caring God, why Schindler, charity organizations, and Make-a-Wish Foundation?

Hi, cadillac59!

You might be able to correct the spelling in the title if you click the Edit and then the Go Advanced button.

Thanks!

If you believe in an Almighty Creator capable of creating the universe,systems within systems sustaining life, why is it hard to believe that the same Creator is capable of sending messengers with revelations and moral codes for man to follow?
Why is is hard to believe in a Heaven and Hell we cannot see while alive?

A creator who can create volcanoes that destroy life and oxygen,air,water that sustains life,
Why is it hard to believe that same creator is capable of judging his creations whether they do right or wrong and meting out justice even if we escape the human scales of justice/injustice in this world?

According to Wikipedia:

Deism is a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme being created the universe, and that this (and religious truth in general) can be determined using reason and observation of the natural world alone, without a need for either faith or organized religion. Deists tend to, but do not necessarily, reject the notion of divine interventions in human affairs, such as by miracles and revelations. These views contrast with a dependence on revelations, miracles, and faith found in many Judeo-Christian, Islamic and other theistic teachings.

Deists typically reject most supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and tend to assert that God (or "The Supreme Architect") has a plan for the universe that is not altered either by God intervening in the affairs of human life or by suspending the natural laws of the universe. What organized religions see as divine revelation and holy books, most deists see as interpretations made by other humans, rather than as authoritative sources.

Deism became prominent in the 17th and 18th centuries during the Age of Enlightenment, especially in what is now the United Kingdom, France, United States and Ireland, mostly among those raised as Christians who found they could not believe in either a triune God, the divinity of Jesus, miracles, or the inerrancy of scriptures, but who did believe in one god. Initially it did not form any congregations, but in time deism strongly influenced other religious groups, such as Unitarianism and Universalism, which developed from it. It continues to this day in the forms of classical deism and modern deism.

That's interesting. One or more of the members here claim to be more Deist that anything else.

Deity is within us and all around us, part of us. The actual experience cannot be adequately described with words. Words, even written ones are made of Deity but can't describe it at all. We are also Deity but frequently live our lives thinking that our ego and brain is all there is to us. Most of us live in terror of death, not because we might go to hell but because it is an unknown.

As a Pagan I do not reject the supernatural or need published scientific proof that an event occurred. A supreme beingness does constantly help us, in exactly the way we need. Religious communities that do affect me are there because I need to be affected. So, what can I learn from them that will make me a better, more caring, forgiving, assertive and accepting part of Deity?

When someone from a Church, any kind, alludes that I am lost, I look around to discover that I am not. Then I check in with my feelings, Deity is right there, waiting to help me. No, not lost at all. Deity is also present in the person who told me I was lost. Right there, smiling at me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by firmbeliever

If you believe in an Almighty Creator capable of creating the universe,systems within systems sustaining life, why is it hard to believe that the same Creator is capable of sending messengers with revelations and moral codes for man to follow?
Why is is hard to believe in a Heaven and Hell we cannot see while alive?

A creator who can create volcanoes that destroy life and oxygen,air,water that sustains life,
why is it hard to believe that same creator is capable of judging his creations whether they do right or wrong and meting out justice even if we escape the human scales of justice/injustice in this world?

---

As I said before, some arguments can be made for the existence of a god or gods, but I find it an unwarranted leap of faith, based upon nothing really, to attribute any particular nature or character to god (and I cannot see any reason why there has to be only one incidentally) and my observations of history suggest to me that, if there is a god, he's not that concerned about what goes on in the world.

It's a bit like what I quoted on another thread, a passage from one of Bertrand Russell's writings, "If you were granted omniscience, omnipotence and millions of years in which to perfect your world, do you really think the best you could come up with would be the Nazis and the Ku Klux Klan?"

I think that was well-said.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Clough

Hi, cadillac59!

You might be able to correct the spelling in the title if you click the Edit and then the Go Advanced button.

Thanks!

---

Thanks, it worked!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

If there is not an intervening and caring God, why Schindler, charity organizations, and Make-a-Wish Foundation?

---

But good doesn't have to only come from god. There are good people and bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

So what's wrong with deism? Sure, let's say there's a god but he doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen.

---

Because saying there's a God who doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen produces the same evidence as assuming there is no God.

Occam's Razor it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

Because saying there's a God who doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen produces the exact same evidence as assuming there is no God.

Occam's Razor it.

---

No. That was the point I was making. It does not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

Everyone wants a god who intervenes, cares about them, watches over them, rewards them with heaven.

---

Uh no. I couldn't care less if a god existed or not. I go about my life just fine without the need the worship an unseen being.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

I've been giving this some thought, and I've wondered why more people aren't deists? Everyone wants a god who intervenes, cares about them, watches over them, rewards them with heaven. But yet there's no evidence to support any theistic perspective. And, in fact, all of the very best arguments for the existence of god that theists have come up with (and there are some good ones) point only to deism and never directly support any theistic point of view. So what's wrong with deism? Sure, let's say there's a god but he doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen. In fact, isn't this consistent with the history of mankind anyway? If there's really an intervening and caring god, why the Nazis, Pol Pot, and Stalin? Doesn't reality square much better with the notion of a god who is really unconcerned about us all?

Your thoughts, from any perspective, are appreciated.

---

That is not much of a god, and there is no real reason to believe in god if this was god's attitude for us.

If you do the research, there is very good archeologic, scientific, and scholarly proof for the Bible an Jesus Christ. That being said, it is ultimately faith that is required to believe and see that God does care and communicate with us.



G&P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

No. That was the point I was making. It does not.

---

An example please (and also re-reading your posts, I don't see this point you claim to have made)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Uh no. I couldn't care less if a god existed or not. I go about my life just fine without the need the worship an unseen being.

---

That's true. I should have said "some people" (I actually tend to agree with you). By the way deism doesn't involve belief in a god that demands anything of us, let alone worship.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inthebox

That is not much of a god, and there is no real reason to believe in god if this was god's attitude for us.

If you do the research, there is very good archeologic, scientific, and scholarly proof for the Bible an Jesus Christ. That being said, it is ultimately faith that is required to believe and see that God does care and communicate with us.



G&P

---

Archeologic and scientific proof? Proof of what? There's certainly no proof of any kind that god exists, let alone the god of the bible. The best arguments (that are not "proofs" anyway) point at best to deism, not any particular brand of theism.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

an example please (and also re-reading your posts, i don't see this point you claim to have made)

---

Here's what you wrote:

Because saying there's a God who doesn't care about humanity and simply allows things to happen as they happen produces the exact same evidence as assuming there is no God.

How does saying something about the existence or non-existance of god "produce evidence?" Perhaps there is where I don't follow you.

Here's what I meant. If you take a theist's best arguments, say the argument of first cause with the big-bang theory added to it (suggesting the universe had a finite beginning and thus must have had a "cause"), it only leads to the possibility that a god or gods did it but tells you nothing about his/its character. In fact that particular god doesn't have to be a person at all, but might be simply an impersonal force in the universe.

See the point?

I will try to explain as a believer why just "Deism" does not work for me.

As you mentioned Pol Pot and Nazi, their acts in this world was not actually punished while they were alive or even if some were it is nothing compared to the actions and mistreatment others had to endure in their hands.

For this very reason,my belief in the Hereafter and an Almighty Creator who will provide justice even if we escape the worldly life makes sense to me.

Because I can make a list of people who I know deserves to suffer for making others suffer at their hands.
And there is not enough worldly punishment that will make up for the evils in their lives.

I believe in a justice,where those who deserve get due punishment and those who deserve get due reward, deism does not offer justice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cadillac59

How does saying something about the existance or non-existance of god "produce evidence?" Perhaps there is where I don't follow you.

---

This is my point, both a non-intervening god and a non-existent god produce no evidence of a god. Occam's razor says the simplest answer is probably right: Non-existent God.

I guess the point is that I don't understand any advantage that deism has over atheism. At least I can understand theism from the point of wanting to be watched over by something bigger than themselves, even if that is a concept that I personally find almost insultingly childish.

Do you believe there is an advantage in believing in deism over atheism, and if so could you enlighten me?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

This is my point, both a non-intervening god and a non-existent god produce no evidence of a god. Occam's razor says the simplest answer is probably right: Non-existent God.

I guess the point is that I don't understand any advantage that deism has over atheism. At least i can understand theism from the point of wanting to be watched over by something bigger than themselves, even if that is a concept that i personally find almost insultingly childish.

Do you believe there is an advantage in believing in deism over atheism, and if so could you enlighten me?

---

Agree:

If one has a "parent," and that parent did not feed, clothe, shelter, teach, love you etc. functionally speaking does that person really have a parent?



G&P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Capuchin

This is my point, both a non-intervening god and a non-existent god produce no evidence of a god. Occam's razor says the simplest answer is probably right: Non-existent God.

I guess the point is that I don't understand any advantage that deism has over atheism. At least i can understand theism from the point of wanting to be watched over by something bigger than themselves, even if that is a concept that i personally find almost insultingly childish.

Do you believe there is an advantage in believing in deism over atheism, and if so could you enlighten me?

---

Thanks for your comments.

I really cannot say there is an advantage to deism vs. atheism other than the obvious: you can give credit to a theist's best arguments for god (such as design, which I don't think is a particularly good one, or first cause, one that is far better now since the big bang theory) without having to also buy into their particular argument for the character of god. They'll never prove their particular brand of theism, no matter how hard they try, and in fact they almost never try to. Instead they try to prove god exists and from there suppose people will make the jump to their views of god's character (and some people who do not think hard enough about it might).

Actually I've got one foot in the atheist camp myself, so I am in no way advocating theism, or even deism. Coming from a Lutheran background and being gay makes me fairly critical and suspicious of religion in general. I left my Lutheran church because they did not take an affirmative stand in favor of same sex marriage in California in 2008 at the time of an election inititive, so I became disinchanted over Christian teachings. I've not completely decided to leave god behind so deism seems a possible alternative. Hence my question.