Deists: do you believe God ever intervenes?

[ThePainefulTruth]

Dude just wait for the death and see if u will be talking tough and brave like u do now

Easy to say when you're on the barbaric side. I take it you're a volunteer to sling the blade or light the fire.--Shalom, though I doubt you'll ever have any.

 

[Deidre]

Dude just wait for the death and see if u will be talking tough and brave like u do now

What does this mean?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

What does this mean?

I believe that Servant is expressing his opinion that freedom is evil, and rejoices in his belief that its seekers will express cowardice in the face of his divinely mandated justice. Long story short, it was a threat delivered with relish.

 

[Deidre]

I believe that Servant is expressing his opinion that freedom is evil, and rejoices in his belief that its seekers will express cowardice in the face of his divinely mandated justice. Long story short, it was a threat delivered with relish.

I've often wondered why so many feel that if a god exists, that he/it is interested in frightening his creation into belief.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

I've often wondered why so many feel that if a god exists, that he/it is interested in frightening his creation into belief.

Exactly. That's what hell and other forms of divine retribution are all about, projecting fear through the gods and religions vindictive/sadistic men have invented for that purpose.

 

[columbus]

In your idea of an after life...is there a judgement day that precludes entering into it?

No. Judgement strikes me as one of those petty things humans do because of our limitations. Nothing else about the known universe suggests that judgement exists. I prefer that death is the great leveler, and we leave behind the pain, fear, frustration and rejoin that which is perfect, eternal and changeless.

I think it a bit immoral to prefer fairness over perfection.

Tom

 

[Servant_of_the_One1]

What does this mean?

I mean just wait for the death.
Its easy to talk while alive, but most of regret comes after dying.

 

[Deidre]

I mean just wait for the death.
Its easy to talk while alive, but most of regret comes after dying.

Okay, I see. How can one ever really know if what he/she has done on earth is 'enough' in God's eyes?

 

[columbus]

I mean just wait for the death.
Its easy to talk while alive, but most of regret comes after dying.

I'm so glad that is just an opinion made up by humans who cannot possibly know what they are talking about.
Tom

 

[Deidre]

No. Judgement strikes me as one of those petty things humans do because of our limitations. Nothing else about the known universe suggests that judgement exists. I prefer that death is the great leveler, and we leave behind the pain, fear, frustration and rejoin that which is perfect, eternal and changeless.

I think it a bit immoral to prefer fairness over perfection.

Tom

This is well stated, thanks Tom.

I'm slowly but surely realizing that I'd still be an atheist, had I not been faced with any tragedy last year, with my grandmother becoming ill and dying. And what I mean by that is ...I didn't identify with atheism long enough to make sense of tragedy without a faith to hold me up. Maybe if I had been an atheist for ten years, I wouldn't have had a spiritual 'crisis,' of sorts. Idk. Hard to say.

There could very well be a deity but after all this dialogue on here, and with others elsewhere...think atheism makes more sense day by day.

 

[columbus]

Maybe if I had been an atheist for ten years, I wouldn't have had a spiritual 'crisis,' of sorts. Idk. Hard to say.

Cue: Beatles "Long and winding road"
Tom

 

[Deidre]

Cue: Beatles "Long and winding road"
Tom

Lol yes

And in a way, I’m glad this all rolled out like this…as painful and confusing as it’s been. Not glad I lost a loved one…but in this, I find myself returning to what I left, atheism. And I think there is merit in when you leave something and return to it, it was the right ‘choice’ all along. I put choice in quotes because atheism is not really a ‘choice,’ per se.

Have a feeling Thomas Paine would have been an atheist if he were here, today. Just a guess. lol

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

Lol yes

And in a way, I’m glad this all rolled out like this…as painful and confusing as it’s been. Not glad I lost a loved one…but in this, I find myself returning to what I left, atheism. And I think there is merit in when you leave something and return to it, it was the right ‘choice’ all along. I put choice in quotes because atheism is not really a ‘choice,’ per se.

Have a feeling Thomas Paine would have been an atheist if he were here, today. Just a guess. lol

As long as we (with emotions as engines) adhere to logic and reason under an agnostic umbrella, we can't go wrong. Whatever the Truth is, there God will be....or not. If the atheist is right, neither the atheist nor the deist will ever know it. But if the deist is right, both will know it--and I suspect the party will be just as meaningful for both since they did the best they could with the information at hand, and didn't claim knowledge they didn't have.

BTW, if Paine were alive today, I don't think he would find any knowledge we've gained since his time which would influence him either way on the question of the existence of God. There's still zero evidence that has a bearing on it, which with all we've learned, is an amazing statement.

 

[Deidre]

As long as we (with emotions as engines) adhere to logic and reason under an agnostic umbrella, we can't go wrong. Whatever the Truth is, there God will be....or not. If the atheist is right, neither the atheist nor the deist will ever know it. But if the deist is right, both will know it--and I suspect the party will be just as meaningful for both since they did the best they could with the information at hand, and didn't claim knowledge they didn't have.

BTW, if Paine were alive today, I don't think he would find any knowledge we've gained since his time which would influence him either way on the question of the existence of God. There's still zero evidence that has a bearing on it, which with all we've learned, is an amazing statement.

That's a great point. I wonder how culturally acceptable atheism was back then. I wonder what he might have thought of Pascal's Wager?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

That's a great point. I wonder how culturally acceptable atheism was back then.

Deism and agnosticism were pretty much (or totally) equated with atheism, and things haven't changed much. How many people know what deism is, or that agnosticism is different from atheism. Teddy Roosevelt called Paine a "dirty little atheist", and things haven't changed much.

I wonder what he might have thought of Pascal's Wager?

Probably not much different than how we misunderstand it today. Pascal's Wager is a cynical exercise in playing the philosophical odds. That's not the same thing as staking your soul on a sincere belief. As Thomas Jefferson said, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear"......or playing the odds.

 

[Deidre]

Deism and agnosticism were pretty much (or totally) equated with atheism, and things haven't changed much. How many people know what deism is, or that agnosticism is different from atheism. Teddy Roosevelt called Paine a "dirty little atheist", and things haven't changed much.



Probably not much different than how we misunderstand it today. Pascal's Wager is a cynical exercise in playing the philosophical odds. That's not the same thing as staking your soul on a sincere belief. As Thomas Jefferson said, "Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear"......or playing the odds.

Yes, agree. Not to mention, Pascal's Wager was really designed more towards ''lukewarm'' Christians, not atheists or even deists. Thing about Pascal is that his wager was all about the Christian god, so...there's a lot to bet there. lol

It's been speculated that he meant it as a joke, but I don't think so. Think he was dead serious with that 'wager.' lol

 

[Rick O'Shez]

I don't know if free will always comes into play. If a God exists, in a scenario like this, I chalk it up to 'life happens.'
Too bad there isn't a category or label that suits a person who is between atheism and deism. lol I'm leaning more towards agnosticism/atheism. Open to the idea of a deity existing, but since we will never really 'know' with certainty, I don't want to spend too much time pondering all the possibilities that might exist.

So do deists generally believe in a non-interventionist God?

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

So do deists generally believe in a non-interventionist God?

Through most of the history of the word, that's been the defining tenet--stipulating that it's a reasoned approach to the existence of God. But in modern times, there have been many hyphenated mutations of the word:
Classic-Deism, Ceremonial-Deism, Intuitive-Deism, Moralistic/Therapeutic-Deism, Christian-Deism (GAAH!), Continental-Deism, Modern-Deism, Monodeism, Pandeism, Panendeism, Process-Deism, Provisional-Deism, Polydeism, Scientific-Deism (oxymoron), Humanistic-Deism, Lost-In-The-Shuffle-Deism. Most of these are outright attempts to undermine the philosophy and create confusion, or efforts to make deism more diverse and inclusive regardless of the effects of such dilution.

The original deism has been designated classic(i.e. laissez faire)-deism which is pretty much as a put down for being outdated and passe. The most common modern reiteration of the philosophy is that deism is simply a reasoned approach to God. Fine, but that's nothing more that agnosticism.

 

[Deidre]

I'm leaning back to atheism again. Left it...went exploring other faiths, belief systems...etc. And at the end of the day, it's the most logical conclusion. However, I'm open to a deity existing, for no one can say with certainty...'a deity surely doesn't exist.' One may, but of the religious 'versions' I've seen, that is where I'm most skeptical. @ThePainefulTruth -I'm glad you chimed in this thread.

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

I'm leaning back to atheism again. Left it...went exploring other faiths, belief systems...etc. And at the end of the day, it's the most logical conclusion. However, I'm open to a deity existing, for no one can say with certainty...'a deity surely doesn't exist.' One may, but of the religious 'versions' I've seen, that is where I'm most skeptical. @ThePainefulTruth -I'm glad you chimed in this thread.

Thanks.
Like I say, deism and atheism are pretty much simpatico as long as no certainty is claimed.

One reason that I think Paine was a deist is because, unlike atheism, which is just a disbelief in God, deism takes the irrationality of revealed religions to task. No small point I think.

That's what's behind this quote from The Age of Reason (which I like to find any excuse I can to re-post it). Rarely is the expression of one’s concept of religion more timelessly profound or majestic:

“It is only in the CREATION that all our ideas and conceptions of a word of God can unite. The Creation speaketh an universal language.... It is an ever-existing original, which every man can read. It cannot be forged; it cannot be counterfeited; it cannot be lost; it cannot be altered; it cannot be suppressed. It does not depend upon the will of man whether it shall be published or not; it publishes itself from one end of the earth to the other. It preaches to all nations and to all worlds; and this Word of God reveals to man all that is necessary for man to know of God.”

That's like a deist version of the Apostle's Creed.

It's not a belief in God, or not, that's the problem, it's a belief in a revealed, interactive God, that sets up all the strife and is an irrational foundation for living.