Deism - Page 4

Vinterland · 08-25-2007, 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Probability_Amplitude

Quote:

Deism typically rejects miracles. If there are rational explanations then they would not be miracles.

I disagree. Everything is bound by logic, even God (this is why I say I'm influenced by Desit philosophy) What makes something a miracle, IMHO is that it is extremely rare or it can not be properly explained by those who witness it.

You too? Well, I think you're a bit confused, I'm not sure if it's what you've read about Deism elsewhere or if its QuantamTheory who purported the false notion that God is logical. It's really ironic how many theists like QuantamTheory and others imagine they know the mind of God.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jayhawker Soule

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vinterland

I agree that deist's and atheists think very similarly ...

While this may be true in the case of some 'atheists', it serves as little more than evidence of sloppy thinking. Fundamental to all theism, including deism, is appeal to supernatural agency. Deism is simply the theism of the God-of-the-Gaps.

Precisely in that respect, Deism is no better than Islam or Christianity.

niranjan · 08-25-2007, 06:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSocialistAlliance

Dear Agnostics, I am a Deist strongly influenced by the philosophy of agnosticism and would like to address this post specifically on Deism.

Deism is a religious philosophy and movement that became prominent in England, France, and the United States in the 17th and 18th centuries and continues to this day. Deism differs from theism in that according to Deism God does not interfere with human life and the laws of the universe.

Deists typically reject supernatural events (prophecy, miracles) and divine revelation prominent in organized religion, along with holy books and revealed religions that assert the existence of such things. Instead, Deists hold that religious beliefs must be founded on human reason and observed features of the natural world, and that these sources reveal the existence of one God or supreme being.

In America, Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by Deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of separation of church and state, expressed in the religious freedom clause of the First Amendment to the Constitution. Founding Fathers who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, John Adams,Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, Hugh Williamson, James Wilson, and James Madison.

Although these men were members of traditional Christian denominations (Hugh Williamson was a Presbyterian and the rest were Episcopalians), their political speeches show distinct Deistic influence. Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly Deist. These include Ethan Allen and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize Deism throughout America and Europe). Elihu Palmer (1764-1806) wrote the "Bible" of American Deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize Deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York."

Contemporary Deism attempts to integrate classical Deism with modern philosophy and the current state of scientific knowledge. This attempt has produced a wide variety of personal beliefs under the broad classification/category of belief of "Deism". The Modern Deism Web site includes one list of the unofficial tenets of modern deism.

Classical Deism held that a human's relationship with God was impersonal: God created the world and set it in motion but does not actively intervene in individual human affairs but rather through Divine Providence. Some modern Deists have modified this classical view and believe that humanity's relationship with God is transpersonal and that God intervenes in the world in ways that are subtle and beyond human understanding (Which would appear to conflict with the basic principle of stripping away the "mysteries" of religion).

Because Deism accepts God without accepting claims of divine revelation, it appeals to people from both ends of the religious spectrum. Antony Flew, for example, is a convert from atheism, and Raymond Fontaine was a Roman Catholic priest for over 20 years. William Veader is another well-known Deist.

Modern Deists hold a wide range of views on the nature of God and God's relationship to the world. The common area of agreement is the desire to use reason, experience, and nature as the basis of belief.

Finally, Deists hold a variety of opinions about prayer:

Some contemporary Deists believe (with the classical Deists) that God has created the universe perfectly, so no amount of supplication, request, or begging can change the fundamental nature of the universe; Whist other Deists believe that God is not an entity that can be contacted by human beings through petitions for relief; rather, God can only be experienced through the nature of the universe.

Happy Posting

Good thread. I have gone through material on deism, and I understand that deism is based on understanding God or the truth or the Infinite through reason. Rationalism is highly emphasized in deism,and I believe this is very important.

Both hinduism and buddhism too have a strong deistic element and tradition within them and gives great importance to reason and logic.

Here is a famous teaching of the Hindu prophet Swami Vivekananda on reason and logical thinking ....

Why religions should claim that they are not bound to abide by the standpoint of reason, no one knows. If one does not take the standard of reason there cannot be any true judgement, even in the case of religions.One religion may ordain something very hideous.For instance, the Mohammedan religion allows Mohammedans to kill all who are not of their religion. It is clearly stated in the Koran, "Kill the infidels if they do not become Mohammedans." They must be put to fire and sword. Now if we tell a Mohammedan that this is wrong, he will naturally ask : "How do you know that ? How do you know it is not good ? My book says it is." If you say your book is older, there will come the Buddhist, and say, his book is much older still. Then will come the Hindu, and say, his books are the oldest of all. Therefore referring to books will not do. Where is the standard by which you can compare ? You will say, look at the Sermon on the Mount, and the Mohammedan will reply, look at the Ethics of the Koran. The Mohammedan will say, who is the arbiter as to which is the better of the two? Neither the New Testament nor the Koran can be the arbiter in a quarrel between them. There must be some independent authority , and that cannot be any book, but something which is universal ; and what is more universal than reason ? It has been said that reason is not strong enough; it does not always help us to get the Truth; many times it makes mistakes , and therefore the conclusion is that we must believe in the authority of a church! That was said to me by a Roman Catholic, but I could not see the logic of it. On the other hand I should say, if reason be so weak, a body of priests would be weaker, and I am not going to accept their verdict but I will abide by my reason, because with all its weakness there is some chance of my getting at truth through it; while by the other means, there is no such hope at all.

---Swami Vivekananda

The reason why religion has such a bad name nowadays is because of the irrational superstitions and prejudices of some religious people.

And for this reason , I believe that strict rationalism should be imbibed in every religion, so that prejudices and superstitions are filtered off. Each and every religion should incorporate a sound deistic element in it. I believe this will go a long way in getting rid of the evils of religion, namely superstitions and prejudices.