ThePainefulTruth
Romantic-Cynic
Deism is no better at proving the existence of God than any other religious belief. And logic can't prove God either.
But, since there's no evidence (other than ancient hearsay) for God, deism and atheism are the only ones that face the question rationally, and therefore, the only ones left on the rational thought field by default.
On the grounds that there is something, not nothing. It's excruciatingly simple.
"Nothing" is not evidence for anything, which only leaves atheism and deism that deal rationally with it since the rest manufacture their evidence irrationally, erroneously or through corruption.
I don't pretend to know anything important about "God".
I don't assume anything about God. I am, for all practical purposes, an atheist. Not because I don't believe in God. Rather, because I don't believe in religion.
Tom
That's a good argument against religion, but not against deism.
Yes, very much so, deist monotheist agnostic panentheist. From my about me page:
These words (from my religion) have multiple meanings. My use of them...
Deist -- I reject (for myself) revealed religions and revealed spiritual paths. I reject revealed truth claims from these.
I'm assuming you don't just reject them out-of-hand, that is, based on lack of evidence or evidence against divine revelation.
Monotheist -- I believe in one God, the creator of everything good and beautiful, a personal God with whom I have a moment by moment personal relationship.
The reason there could only be one omnipotent God (omnipotent enough to create the universe anyway) is because there could not be two omnipotent gods, by definition. And how can you have a "personal relationship" with a God that you don't even know exists?
Agnostic
-- I don't believe we can know anything about the structure and functioning of the spiritual realm.
Yes, at least thus far there's no evidence on which we could base any belief beyond pure speculation.
Panentheist -- I believe God indwells and inhabits everything that exists, material and spiritual.
Since we're on thin ice already when we speculate there might be a deistic god, whether that God is pandeistic or panendeistic is totally irrelevant from our perspective--which isn't an argument against such speculation, just that it doesn't change anything.