Are diests really different from the Christian view? (Jesus Christ, Deists)

[Rex]

All this talk about who wrote the constitution and what are they, and what affiliation are the founding fathers.

Of course we recognize them as diests which just means they didn't think the bible was holy and they didn't believe in the trinity but they still had the Christian view with the Christian God right?

If that is the case then the diests who founded the US was based on Christian Views.


right?

[true blood]

Exactly. Diest believe in the existance of a deity. Christianity is a way of living based on the principles of Jesus Christ which we hope is acceptable to that deity(not the man, Jesus Christ). That's my view. I've never associated myself with any denomination or religion however I view myself sorta like a "Christian Deist"

[Green Gaia]

It's Deist, fellas.

[Rex]

Originally Posted by Maize

It's Deist, fellas.

I always get confused..

[Green Gaia]

Yes.

From the Deism thread:


Deism is belief in a God or first cause based on reason rather than faith, distinguishing it from theism. Deism is usually synonymous with "natural religion" in 18th century Enlightenment writings. Deism originated in 17th century Europe, gaining popularity in the 18th century Enlightenment especially in America as a modernist movement inspired by the success of the scientific method. Deists emphasize the exclusive application of reason and personal experience to religious questions. Deism is concerned with those truths which humans can discover through a process of reasoning, independent of any claimed divine revelation through scripture or prophets. Most Deists believe that God does not interfere with the world or create miracles.

Deism was founded on the belief that the universe was created by a God who then made no further intervention in its affairs, often expressed by the metaphor of the "Divine Watchmaker" who created a mechanism so perfect as to be self-regulating.


The text I haved bolded clearly show that Christian and Deistic views are not alike at all.

[Mr Spinkles]

At any rate, our Founding Fathers did not want any one particular religion to be part of our government...they wanted a secular government that follows the will of the people, but at the same time guarantees certain basic rights no matter what the will of the people might be at any given time.

[true blood]

No they didn't. They wanted all religion to be a part of this nation. The “wall of separation between church and state” that Jefferson described was a wall to separate the government from ever interfering with our religious freedoms, not a wall to separate religious expression from our schools, courthouses, and other public places.

Early U.S. courts clearly understood Jefferson’s intent when he wrote about ‘a wall of separation between church and state’. In fact, unlike recent court cases, they quoted his letter in its entirety, including the full context. Today, only 8 words are quoted from his letter. In 1878 there was a case called ‘Reynolds vs. United States’. In this case, in which polygamy was condemned by the courts, the argument was that government was interfering with religious expression. In other words, the U.S. government had no right to prohibit polygamy, since it was a form of religious expression by a certain group. It was understood that the government could only interfere when overt acts against peace and good order were occurring. In other words, such things as human sacrifice and polygamy could not “hide” under the pretense of religious freedom. I have already seen that the founding fathers, and the entire nation never dreamed that a future generation would twist the meaning of the 1st Amendment so that it would be used to remove the freedom of religious expressions such as prayer, Bible reading, etc. from public schools. It is obvious that they encouraged such things.

Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court, William Rehnquist said:

“There is simply no historical foundation for the proposition that the framers intended to build a wall of separation”

He also said:

“ - - the greatest injury of the “wall” notion is its mischievous diversion of judges from the actual intentions of the drafters of the Bill of Rights - - - The “wall of separation between church and State” is a metaphor based on bad history, a metaphor which has proved useless as a guide to judging. It
should be frankly and explicitly abandoned.”

[Rex]

TrueBlood I am going to have to disagree. Being a Deist means you have the belief that "organized" religion is not for you even though Jefferson and others believed in the "Christian" God.

Saying that of course he would want a seperation of church and state from showing religious expression.

If not for that then for biases. If I was muslim and I got tried in a Court with a large picture of Jesus on the wall then I would say my trial is biased to the Christian view.

[painted wolf]

christians beleive in Jesus Christ.. Deists do not....

therefore IMHO Deist are not christians.

90% of religions belive in a deity or 'god' or what-have-you....

wa:do

[true blood]

If someone's religious expression is against peace and good order, then yes it should be removed. If you feel the government should interfer with my "religious" freedom that isn't against peace and good order,well, more power to you and the government.