Recommended Posts

Deism seems like that last stop before getting off the religion/belief/supernatural being train. Hardly any reason at all to consider one's self a deist, no reward (or punishment), has no affect on one's life and, unlike those ultra-sure religio-peeps who just know their superduper task master exists, deists have no reason to even mention their 'belief' which really is only slightly less than saying, 'I don't believe in anything'.

 

I guess deism is for people weaning themselves off of the supernatural-being teat.

Link to post
10 minutes ago, damnthing said:

Deism seems like that last stop before getting off the religion/belief/supernatural being train. Hardly any reason at all to consider one's self a deist, no reward (or punishment), has no affect on one's life and, unlike those ultra-sure religio-peeps who just know their superduper task master exists, deists have no reason to even mention their 'belief' which really is only slightly less than saying, 'I don't believe in anything'.

 

I guess deism is for people weaning themselves off of the supernatural-being teat.

 

 

To my understanding:  Deism posits a Creator God, who got everything started -- then lost interest and wandered off.  No prayer.  No Scripture.  No study.  No revelation.  No intervention.  No help.  No hindrance.  No fear.  This may be unfair.  It's my take.

 

The advantages:

  • You get to say -- "Yes, of course I believe in God".
  • You get to take any kind of oath or Pledge to God -- without having to explain anything.  If people want to make assumptions about the nature of Deist belief -- that's their problem.
  • Really, it takes so little time out of your day.          :birgits_giggle:

 

Is being a Deist better than being an Agnostic?  On reflection, no.  It isn't.

  1.   Repeat after me.  "I don't believe.  I don't disbelieve.  I don't care."  Wasn't that simple?
  2.   I have an ethical obligation to be truthful.  On reflection, I have no problem with reciting obvious nonsense as part of public ceremony.  Over the years, I have been called up many times for jury duty.  It's always the same thing.  They say -- Raise your right hand.  I raise my hand.  They recite the oath ending with -- so help me God.  By the time I have a chance to think about it -- it's over.  Really.  Am I to argue with a bored clerk who just wants to get it over with?  That's all I want at that point.  To get it over with.
  3. Really.  It takes so little time out of my day.     :birgits_giggle:

 

Is being a Deist any better than being an Atheist?

  • Just answer honestly.  No.  I don't believe.
  • Pledges and oaths?  It's not your problem.  If they care about truthfulness, they shouldn't insist on the magic words.
  • Really.  It takes so little time.     :birgits_giggle:

 

In purely pragmatic terms, Deism is a proto Atheism.  It's better to claim belief, than to face down a crazy judge, an inquisitor, or a lunatic mob.  In less dramatic terms -- to get through a family Thanksgiving without drama.

 

I'm getting to be an old dog.  I would rather be happy than worry about being right.  There are some hills NOT worth dying for.

 

:mellow:

 

 

 

 

Link to post
17 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

To my understanding:  Deism posits a Creator God, who got everything started -- then lost interest and wandered off.  No prayer.  No Scripture.  No study.  No revelation.  No intervention.  No help.  No hindrance.  No fear.  This may be unfair.  It's my take.

 

The advantages:

  • You get to say -- "Yes, of course I believe in God".
  • You get to take any kind of oath or Pledge to God -- without having to explain anything.  If people want to make assumptions about the nature of Deist belief -- that's their problem.
  • Really, it takes so little time out of your day.          :birgits_giggle:

 

Is being a Deist better than being an Agnostic?  On reflection, no.  It isn't.

  1.   Repeat after me.  "I don't believe.  I don't disbelieve.  I don't care."  Wasn't that simple?
  2.   I have an ethical obligation to be truthful.  On reflection, I have no problem with reciting obvious nonsense as part of public ceremony.  Over the years, I have been called up many times for jury duty.  It's always the same thing.  They say -- Raise your right hand.  I raise my hand.  They recite the oath ending with -- so help me God.  By the time I have a chance to think about it -- it's over.  Really.  Am I to argue with a bored clerk who just wants to get it over with?  That's all I want at that point.  To get it over with.
  3. Really.  It takes so little time out of my day.     :birgits_giggle:

 

Is being a Deist any better than being an Atheist?

  • Just answer honestly.  No.  I don't believe.
  • Pledges and oaths?  It's not your problem.  If they care about truthfulness, they shouldn't insist on the magic words.
  • Really.  It takes so little time.     :birgits_giggle:

 

In purely pragmatic terms, Deism is a proto Atheism.  It's better to claim belief, than to face down a crazy judge, an inquisitor, or a lunatic mob.  In less dramatic terms -- to get through a family Thanksgiving without drama.

 

I'm getting to be an old dog.  I would rather be happy than worry about being right.  There are some hills NOT worth dying for.

 

:mellow:

 

 

 

 

If you believed all that you wouldn't expend the energy you do to visit the fora here. You find satisfaction in...not so much arguing or disagreeing  with Leo the Lion (odd that he picked a lion as his avatar, considering their gustatorial delight in having x tians for dinner) but in sorting out and putting down your thoughts.

I have no interest nor any false hope that I could convince anyone to change the way they think but it's more just an organizational exercise, putting down thoughts on paper as it were

Link to post
15 minutes ago, damnthing said:

If you believed all that you wouldn't expend the energy you do to visit the fora here. You find satisfaction in...not so much arguing or disagreeing  with Leo the Lion (odd that he picked a lion as his avatar, considering their gustatorial delight in having x tians for dinner) but in sorting out and putting down your thoughts.

I have no interest nor any false hope that I could convince anyone to change the way they think but it's more just an organizational exercise, putting down thoughts on paper as it were

 

 

:mellow:

 

I never discussed Dan's avatar with him.  I expect it has something to do with Christian symbolism.  The whole King of beasts thing -- throne -- crown -- roses.  I minored in English Literature.  Christian symbolism is extensive  -- and Dan has his issues.  If I had to guess, I suspect it has something to do with The Witch, The Lion and the Wardrobe by C. S. Lewis.  The great Protestant theologian.  Or maybe Dan just likes lions.

 

:mellow:

 

 

Link to post
26 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

:mellow:

 

I never discussed Dan's avatar with him.  I expect it has something to do with Christian symbolism.  The whole King of beasts thing -- throne -- crown -- roses.  I minored in English Literature.  Christian symbolism is extensive  -- and Dan has his issues.  If I had to guess, I suspect it has something to do with The Witch, The Lion and the Wardrobe by C. S. Lewis.  The great Protestant theologian.  Or maybe Dan just likes lions.

 

:mellow:

 

 

My mind went to the Wizard of Oz, put em up, put em up...come on, put em up...

Link to post
14 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I was mistaken and I stand corrected.  Deism is much more harshly anti-religion than Atheism.  Atheism is only an absence of religion.  Deism is opposed to religion.  An alternative.          :whist:

 

:mellow:

 

 

My take on deism is that it's a belief in a supreme being who created...whatever, and then went on to do other things with no further interest or intervention. I don't see that as anti-religion so much as religion-lite, all the supreme being without any of the associated guilt baggage. Poof, I made you, there you go, have at it and good luck.

 

The odd thing is that, when it comes to theists they claim to have knowledge of their supreme being via faerie tales and mythologies whereas deists can't have any of that since their belief is their supreme being pooped them out and walked away. So how could deists even ever have a clue about a supreme being?

 

And why even bother creating, much less believing in an utterly indifferent creator who hasn't a clue what you've been up to? How can you believe in something that, in your belief states that the object of your belief has had nothing to do with you after initially creating your world?

 

It would like being a child of an anonymous sperm donor and always worrying about what your 'creator' might think about this thought or that action. Sure you don't know who your father is, only that biologically you had to have had one. And in that case you at least know you have/had a 'father', somewhere, evidenced by your own existence. The same can't be said of a supreme being. That's just wishful thinking.

Link to post
45 minutes ago, damnthing said:

My take on deism is that it's a belief in a supreme being who created...whatever, and then went on to do other things with no further interest or intervention. I don't see that as anti-religion so much as religion-lite, all the supreme being without any of the associated guilt baggage. Poof, I made you, there you go, have at it and good luck.

 

The odd thing is that, when it comes to theists they claim to have knowledge of their supreme being via faerie tales and mythologies whereas deists can't have any of that since their belief is their supreme being pooped them out and walked away. So how could deists even ever have a clue about a supreme being?

 

And why even bother creating, much less believing in an utterly indifferent creator who hasn't a clue what you've been up to? How can you believe in something that, in your belief states that the object of your belief has had nothing to do with you after initially creating your world?

 

It would like being a child of an anonymous sperm donor and always worrying about what your 'creator' might think about this thought or that action. Sure you don't know who your father is, only that biologically you had to have had one. And in that case you at least know you have/had a 'father', somewhere, evidenced by your own existence. The same can't be said of a supreme being. That's just wishful thinking.

 

 

You make some good points.  I really like your sperm donor analogy.  It's spot on.

 

As for the Bible stories:  I prefer Norse mythology.  The plots are much better.  The characters are more interesting, better developed and way more believable.  Plus, the characters have real development over time -- and they're really good, entertaining stories.  It's a real shame that the Bible stories aren't that good.

 

I'm still inclined to see Deism in opposition to institutional religion.  Thomas Paine, author of Age of Reason, was one of the driving forces behind the American revolution.  King George was head of the English church.  The colonists had to oppose Church and Monarch as a package.  Some of that attitude seems to be persisting.  That there is no Devine Right of Kings to rule -- or for the clergy to lead, or even be socially prominent.

 

The enemy isn't God.  It's the Church and the Clergy and the Scripture.

 

:mellow:

 

 

Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.