From what might one infer the existence of a deity that did nothing of which we are aware and does nothing of which we are aware?
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
A Deists Did Nothing Does Nothing Deity
- Thread starter Jayhawker Soule
- Start date
dust1n
Zindīq
It's been a long time, but doesn't Spinoza arrive at this through a series of propositions?
The question in the OP is directed solely to those deists who do not make such a claim.
Spinoza was a pantheist at best. I see no way in which he offered any support for Deism.
Neo Deist
Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
Deism does not say that God did nothing. A commonly shared belief of deism is that God is the creator, made the universe and the laws of nature that govern it, gave living beings free will, and set it all in motion. From there, He has no reason to be involved as things run on their own accord. Think of the universe as being on auto pilot. It follows its natural course.
As to how or why deists believe in a deity that we can't see or read about, the universe and the laws of nature seem to be too perfect to just be random. A study of biology and zoology will reveal thousands upon thousands of unique attributes that animals and other organisms possess in order to survive (us included). Those things appear to be by design, not random chance.
And yet you indicated elsewhere that you were not invested in such a belief and, when challenged, dismissively relegated it to the category of classical deism.
So my question remains: What inspires or compells you to posit a deity that (a) did not necessarily play a role in creation, and (b) does not necessarily intervene today?
dust1n
Zindīq
I guess the difference being that either God is of nature, and does't really mean or do anything to humans, or God is completely separate of nature, and doesn't really mean or do anything to humans?
This being a DIR I hesitate to offer opinions on the relative merits of deism and pantheism.
dust1n
Zindīq
Gotcha. Didn't realize I stumbled into a DIR from the main page again.
Neo Deist
Th.D. & D.Div. h.c.
I already answered those questions.
A: I do believe that God was the creator of the universe, just not according to Genesis.
B: Free will and the laws of nature.
I would be interested in your opinions on that.
Would you like to hear mine?
I hesitate to intrude on your thread. You know, since the OP has me on ignore.
Tom