Jump to content
Goodbye Jesus

Deism


The-Captain

Recommended Posts

There is room for Deism in my life. The theology is fairly simple. God leaves us alone to blunder our way through life. It suits my life without Christianity just fine. But even Deism does not solve everything, it is just trading one set of beliefs for another. See how programmed we are to want to belong to a religion? Many feel we need some kind of religion to help regulate our lives. Why not just live life like you want to live it. We do not have to believe in a power greater than us. We are the Divine, our thoughts are what guides our lives. Our actions and thoughts are our own. Without us, there is no conciousness to God. We give him life by imagining he is alive. Even the Bible speaks of a time when man lived at peace with one another without religion and without worshipping a creator.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 50
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • SWIM

    8

  • The-Captain

    8

  • Grandpa Harley

    6

  • bellsybop

    5

There is room for Deism in my life. The theology is fairly simple. God leaves us alone to blunder our way through life. It suits my life without Christianity just fine. But even Deism does not solve everything, it is just trading one set of beliefs for another. See how programmed we are to want to belong to a religion? Many feel we need some kind of religion to help regulate our lives. Why not just live life like you want to live it. We do not have to believe in a power greater than us. We are the Divine, our thoughts are what guides our lives. Our actions and thoughts are our own. Without us, there is no conciousness to God. We give him life by imagining he is alive. Even the Bible speaks of a time when man lived at peace with one another without religion and without worshipping a creator.

 

Everything you've described HereticZero is what I think about every time I delve into this specific religious underbelly. I used to be a Deist, but more I mulled it over, the more I believed in the nameless narrator's abandonment theory [hence the Fight Club passage in my last comment on this thread]. If God truly had a policy of non-interference, yet he created life, the universe and everything, then what's not to say that his path amounts to spiritual abandonment. If life really was commenced by a simple set of biochemical chain reactions, who's not to say that the Creator used the Earth an orphanage to house his abandoned knuckle children. Some of that pus-colored gel landed in the right heat vent and it took off from there. Once the Creator was done, he went someplace to establish another franchise and the aforementioned process repeats like a buggy subroutine in a sub-standard C++ program. Furthermore, considering how the big bang theory is the prevailing theory for the origins of the universe, I have a feeling that the Creator heated up a burrito that was so hot that even he couldn't touch, and "conflated" into the known universe.

 

I know my theories are somewhat sadistic, but from an objective perspective, we simply don't know whether or not there is a God or whether or not the universe is alive. In a way, my spiritual beliefs don't screw up the status quo, therefore I can say I am comfortably agnostic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
It seems like Deists believe this creating force is able to think, while atheists do not, but we all have to believe in some form of "creating" force - conscious or not.

 

That means Azathoth is an atheist god :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Evolution doesn't make sense to me..."

 

So decades of reasearch and volumes of scientific investigation makes no sense...but a supreme sky being who wished everything into existence a few thousand years ago does? I quit reading after that sentence. :blink:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pleading stupidity doesn't work in court either...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I made it perfectly clear.. and I'm not pleading stupidity either. I am just not certain what I choose to believe. Does my answer have to be in concrete at this point in my life? My answer is no. The idea of something creating us is just that. I don't know what it might be no more than anyone else does apparently... but I chose an energy as my answer. I do not believe it interferes or communicates with us. Perhaps it just created us for the purpose of letting us re-create.. but I don't dwell on it. Although I ponder sometimes. And I don't feel the need to belong to a religion either. Deists aren't a religion. It is a bunch of people who have their own set of beliefs of a god/energy as a creator. I have a deep respect for atheism or I would not be here amongst you all, but feel like I'm being somewhat mocked because I don't know exactly where I stand. Pardon me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I made it perfectly clear.. and I'm not pleading stupidity either. I am just not certain what I choose to believe. Does my answer have to be in concrete at this point in my life? My answer is no. The idea of something creating us is just that. I don't know what it might be no more than anyone else does apparently... but I chose an energy as my answer. I do not believe it interferes or communicates with us. Perhaps it just created us for the purpose of letting us re-create.. but I don't dwell on it. Although I ponder sometimes. And I don't feel the need to belong to a religion either. Deists aren't a religion. It is a bunch of people who have their own set of beliefs of a god/energy as a creator. I have a deep respect for atheism or I would not be here amongst you all, but feel like I'm being somewhat mocked because I don't know exactly where I stand. Pardon me.

 

No there is nothing wrong with that, and I for one worry more about someone 100% sure in their beliefs. What mankind as a whole knows amounts to very little, and what one person knows firsthand is far less. If you can believe and there is still room in the universe for that belief (its a big universe after all) then thats your thing. And the question of beginnings (not even the mechanisms so much as they why) is still pretty open ended, bare bones isnt deism just believing that something started it all?

 

No slight intended bellsybop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I made it perfectly clear.. and I'm not pleading stupidity either. I am just not certain what I choose to believe. Does my answer have to be in concrete at this point in my life? My answer is no. The idea of something creating us is just that. I don't know what it might be no more than anyone else does apparently... but I chose an energy as my answer. I do not believe it interferes or communicates with us. Perhaps it just created us for the purpose of letting us re-create.. but I don't dwell on it. Although I ponder sometimes. And I don't feel the need to belong to a religion either. Deists aren't a religion. It is a bunch of people who have their own set of beliefs of a god/energy as a creator. I have a deep respect for atheism or I would not be here amongst you all, but feel like I'm being somewhat mocked because I don't know exactly where I stand. Pardon me.

 

If you were the one who said 'Evolution doesn't make sense to me' then my comment was directed at you... otherwise calm down...

 

EDIT

 

I see you were. I stand by the statement. How exactly doesn't it make 'sense'? There's a lot more empirical evidence that animals change with time than there is for an involved creator deity; in my 5 decades on the planet, Rats have changed the way their blood clotting system works to get round Warferen as a rat 'poison'... it's a non trivial change. So, it wasn't evolutionary adaptation, but 'Goddidit'... now if 'Goddidit' it means that God likes plague and Lyme's disease. IF it's blind chance, then it's just one species out competing another...

 

So, what does your 'Evolution makes no sense' stance predict? From my place in the peanut gallery, it predicts 'squat'... there are no 'rules', and the universe is irrational at a fundamental level, since it's operating at the caprice of a 'creator' deity involved at all levels on a one second per second basis...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seriously though bellsybop what about evolution doesnt make sense to you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Deists aren't a religion. It is a bunch of people who have their own set of beliefs of a god/energy as a creator. I have a deep respect for atheism or I would not be here amongst you all, but feel like I'm being somewhat mocked because I don't know exactly where I stand. Pardon me.

 

 

Bellsy it's perfectly OK that you don't know exactly where you stand. I don't either. I think I am some variety of monist. I don't have any problem with Deism, it is a distinct possibility. I think it was only your remarks on evolution which evoked some comments that you consider "mocking". We all don't know everything, and I hope you will stick around. All of us have taken some heat from time to time for stuff we have said.

 

In my experience, evolution is not taught much in school. Unless you go to college and major in science, you have to make an effort to learn about it yourself, that is, if you are interested. For myself, it bothered me that there was this major gap in my knowledge of the world. I was raised in a church that shoved creationism in my face. I knew it was probably wrong because it made no sense to me. So I read quite a few books on the evolution/creationism controversy. I started out by reading one on Noah's Ark presenting the view that this flood had actually happened and created all the fossil evidence. Then I read the "other side." I read one book where it was basically a trial transcript of one of the school book battles in Alabama. I read accounts of all the evidence presented before the judge. It was many years ago, so I can't remember the name of the book. After my course of reading I was totally convinced that evolution in fact happens. My point is that there is a mountain of information available if there is a point on which you are confused and maybe we can even help you.

 

I don't see a conflict in deism and evolution.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this is deism in a pessemistic nutshell,

 

This is a passage from Fight Club

 

Me, I knew my dad for about six years, but I don't remember anything. My dad, he starts a new family in a new town about every six years. This isn't so much like a family as it's like he sets up a franchise.

 

Now now, what's the first rule of fight club? Say it with me...

 

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Marquis of WHO rules?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think I made it perfectly clear.. and I'm not pleading stupidity either. I am just not certain what I choose to believe. Does my answer have to be in concrete at this point in my life? My answer is no.

 

 

Nobodies answers are set in concrete, we have much more theories then we do facts. BUT theories are:

 

In science, a theory is a mathematical or logical explanation, or a testable model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theories commonly used to describe and explain this behaviour are Newton's theory of universal gravitation (see also gravitation), and general relativity.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory

 

Now, speculation is another thing all together:

It is to think, meditate or reflect on a subject; To deliberate or cogitateto, make an inference based on inconclusive evidence; to surmise or use conjecture.

 

Theory and speculation most of the time comes from a logical observation.

 

So no, I don't personally think it needs to be a concrete, all or nothing, yes or no. But in most cases, in speculation, there should be a logical grounding to it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Marquis of WHO rules?

 

First rule of fight club is "You never talk about fight club".

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is this 'fight club' of which you speak?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

what is this 'fight club' of which you speak?

 

LOL just a brad pitt movie a few years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't get my SOH at times, dear.... Yes I know the film, and even attempted the book...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You really don't get my SOH at times, dear.... Yes I know the film, and even attempted the book...

 

DOH! Yeah I can be a bit dense sometimes! ;)

 

well, enough fun for today, gonna go 4 wheeling, be back later tonight. Have phun with the fundies!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right then... maybe I worded what I stated improperly. And if I caused offense, I meant none. That's my bad.. and I'm sorry. Perhaps what I meant to say was that I do not understand it. Creationism has been my school of thought. I haven't read much, if anything about evolution, therefore I am very uneducated about it. I'm very new to this different way of thinking. I'm not sure it will change my thoughts, but I will get my research done out of fairness to myself and everyone else. But, seriously folks, what difference does it make? To me, very little. I could honestly care less what put us here because the deed is done, right? It is just the screwed up thinking of the biblical god that I don't believe in. Never will again. Which puts me on the same heathenistic thinking level of you guys! And that was meant as a joke... personally I like being a heathen..

 

Now, back to business.. ((hugs))

 

edit: I also said that an energy creator made no sense to me either. But hopefully it's all good now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
I believe something created us.

Would you be able to expand upon why you believe this? I've heard several different scenarios for this idea, but I'm curious what your rational is.

Don't we all believe this? The Universe is "something". The Big Bang is "something". The pre-big-bang-progresso-hot-chicken-noodle-soup was/is something too. I think the problem is rather in the definition of this "something". Was/is this something alive? Is it a being? Is it thinking? Is it aware and planning, etc..? Or is it just a machine, mechanics of some physical/meta-physical world? It seems like Deists believe this creating force is able to think, while atheists do not, but we all have to believe in some form of "creating" force - conscious or not.

 

A lot of conflicts come from misunderstanding of defintions or disagreements of the same, and I think the above is a perfect example of how fragile and complicated communication and transference of ideas really is!

 

Alright! Alright! Hint taken, I'll get right on figuring out that instant telepathic communication. :)

 

I personally look forward to the day when I am able to perform Vulcan Mind Melds. With the right people, it could be a beautifully intimate thing...and for others, I could make them see/feel/think what I do, and maybe they'd finally understand. :grin:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Don't we all believe this? The Universe is "something". The Big Bang is "something". The pre-big-bang-progresso-hot-chicken-noodle-soup was/is something too. I think the problem is rather in the definition of this "something". Was/is this something alive? Is it a being? Is it thinking? Is it aware and planning, etc..? Or is it just a machine, mechanics of some physical/meta-physical world? It seems like Deists believe this creating force is able to think, while atheists do not, but we all have to believe in some form of "creating" force - conscious or not.

 

A lot of conflicts come from misunderstanding of defintions or disagreements of the same, and I think the above is a perfect example of how fragile and complicated communication and transference of ideas really is!

 

Sorry, but nope. "Created us" and "Created the universe" have very different connentations. "Created" implies "Creator" implies "conscious intent". I don't believe the big bang being "something" and a concious entity being "something" make them similar in any way. Everything is something!

 

As for a "creating force", again, this is too vague for me to agree with in any way. If this something is anything, I guess I would say it's the natural laws of the universe (gravity, electro-magnetism, chemical bonding) that contributed to our eventual arrival. But even then, I wouldn't use "creation" as it implies intent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alright! Alright! Hint taken, I'll get right on figuring out that instant telepathic communication. :)

That would be awesome! The day we do communicate that way... we - the community - will be a new entity of life, and develop a meta-consciousness of higher order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Skankboy, but I can tell you didn't really get my point.

 

Sorry, but nope. "Created us" and "Created the universe" have very different connentations. "Created" implies "Creator" implies "conscious intent". I don't believe the big bang being "something" and a concious entity being "something" make them similar in any way. Everything is something!

Well, that's why you can't say "something". We came from something. And that is not Deism. Deism is exactly what you're saying, the difference between the views. Deism believe the "something" was conscious, while you (I hope) do think we came from something, but not necessarily a something that can think.

 

And the reason why I put "created" within quotation marks is to make the focus on the distinction, but disregard the distinction in the sense of interpreting the highly subjective word "created" to be "coming from" or "resulting from" instead of the regular definition of created as made by the hands of some intelligent being.

 

When I write, my quotation marks do give away certain underlying concepts of my reasoning, and this is one. It shows yet again, the words, depending on whoever sends them or who receives them, will result in different responses.

 

As for a "creating force", again, this is too vague for me to agree with in any way.

Energy is a force. The force that drove the Big Bang to inflate faster than the speed of light must have been powerful. Or?

 

And "Creating" as in: the colloquial way of understanding the word "creating", annotated within quotation marks, as "coming from". (But it's so frigging long to write that every time.)

 

 

If this something is anything, I guess I would say it's the natural laws of the universe (gravity, electro-magnetism, chemical bonding) that contributed to our eventual arrival. But even then, I wouldn't use "creation" as it implies intent.

That's why I used quotation marks. The difference between "creation" and creation, or "created" and created, is the authors underlying intentions of interpretation. That in the case of the non-quoted word, it is to be interpreted by its common definition, while in quotation marks the author instructs the reader to not read it literally as the common definition says, but a bit more wide and loose, and that it's required to understand the rest of the argument.

 

You see, here's the thing, Deism and Creationism does say there was a starting point of some form, and they say this starting point was activated by some supernatural intelligence. But what does science say? They say, it all came from a starting point too, but it doesn't say if it was intelligence behind the activation of it or not, but of course (as a scientist ought to do) they have to assume that it wasn't intelligent. And that's my point. We all do think we came from "something", whatever that something was. They call it "created by" instead of "came from", while we have to say "came from" since that is all you really can say. We can't use words like created, designed, tuned, started, and so one, because half of the words in our language, to describe events, are based on the idea of an agent doing the act behind the word! We're locked into a linguistic trap!

 

We can't say, the Universe started at Big Bang, since "started" imply intent or action. So we're left with so few words to correctly describe science. It's very unfortunate. And we see this in debates all the time. One slip-up and someone use an active word of this kind in a colloquial way and *bam* the Christian use that to attack by: "see, you do believe there is an intelligence behind it!" And that's not what the person meant when he used the word, but he intended to use it in the loose and more forgiving way. But people are so tied up in literalism, and no one understands symbols anymore. Maybe we have to start using E-prime?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies Hans. Looks like we were on the same page and I just misunderstood...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My apologies Hans. Looks like we were on the same page and I just misunderstood...

Yeah. I know. Sorry if I came out sounding like blazing guns. It wasn't my intention. Just trying to explain my thought behind it. And it does prove how difficult it is to convey ideas using words. :)

 

Words are symbols too, no wonder things get confusing...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.