We must all bridge the gap between what we believe and what we know with faith. With Deism, you apply reason-based faith, not unquestioning faith. But it is faith, just the same. All of religion (and Atheism) is based on some measure of faith.

Jun 13, 2010 -- 9:02PM, Caspian wrote:

Actually atheism, (*lower case "a") has nothing whatever to do with faith.

Faith's definitions include, a firm belief in something for which there is no proof. A  complete trust. Something that is believed especially with strong conviction.

Precisely. Atheists (capitalized because it is proper noun) exhibit a firm belief that there is no God, a position that they can no more prove than a Deist can prove that God does exist. That there is no God is something that you obviously believe with strong conviction. I think that is a perfectly reasonable conclusion for you to reach, even though you cannot prove it. You have examined the evidence critically, and you have concluded that there is no God. That is faith in action, bridging the gap between what you can prove and what you believe.

"God" as a noun is irrational. There is no proof that a higher power defined as god in any faith system exists. The god characteristics include anthrophomorphism which describes a higher being possessed of the same personality defects as lowly mortals. (jealous, angry, vindictive, damning, etc...)

I absolutely agree that there is no proof of the existence of God, not even a Deist God. But you are attacking the Theist God. The Deist God is in no way anthropomorphic. It is the Theist God who exhibits the worst of human traits as you describe. I concur completely that belief in such a God defies reason. I certainly don't believe in some old white-bearded sky god.

Some claim that a "god" designation can describe creative power and energy. However, that in and of itself is already described and often defined within the sciences and has nothing whatsoever to do with religious conviction.

I have no idea what qualities God possesses. I see only the result. I see natural laws and order and complexity, but anything I believe must confirm to the scientific evidence. I must go where the evidence takes me.

Deism simply put is the rational observation that energies exist to manifest the illusion of materialism. Whereas particle Physics for instance says that not only is everything made of energetic atoms which are theoretical because no atom has ever been observed, but are mostly empty space. And as such those atoms in infinite numbers form our material universe or reality as energetic forms which are at their very essence a power that is constantly moving to a rhythm.
These rhythms can be altered, which is what many attribute "creative visualization" to effect.

I have no idea where you found that definition of Deism. It isn't anything like my own definition or the definition of the hundreds of Deists I have read or with whom I have conversed. Still, each Deist is unique, so I guess it is quite possible that some Deist somewhere believes what you describe.

However, this still is not god. Deism recognizes energetic power as source that is indifferent to the human condition as is, because all things are energy even empathy.

OK, I could agree that what you described is not God, but neither is it any form of Deism with which I am familiar.

There is no thing codified as "god" of organized religion within Deism.

Deism is not an organized religion, and the God I believe in does not resemble the God of any organized religion as far as I know. I guess I do not understand your point here.

Atheism originates from the Greek and simply translates as, "no god". Everyone is born atheist because faith in any higher power described as "god" must be learned, or held in faith without any evidence to support that belief.Atheism doesn't hold faith there is no such thing as god. There is no thing that is god ergo it is not faith to realize that.

Actually, we seem to be born predisposed to religious belief. Essentially every culture has developed some form of religion. I certainly agree, however, that people tend to learn their religion from the people who raise them. That tends to not be the case with Deists. We tend to turn away from the unreasonable and towards the reasonable, much like Atheists and other Freethinkers do. We also tend to not brainwash our own children. We raise them to think for themselves, and if they turn out to be Deists, then they do. Mine certainly did not.

For various reasons, often having to do with the order and complexity of the universe, we Deists lean towards reasoned belief in God. Some come to Deism from Atheism. Others abandon Deism and become Atheists. It is really an individual matter, which is exactly like it should be.

A criticism I have of organized religion is that Theists and other believers exhibit unquestioning faith without proof. Unsupported assertions are not convincing arguments. You have offered no proof that God does not exist. You merely make unsupported assertions. There are some strong arguments in support of Atheism. You have not used them. All of these arguments in support of Atheism fall short of proof. That's OK. I do not claim to possess proof that God exists. But neither do I make assertions that I cannot back up. I look at the evidence, and I lean in the direction of belief. I accept the possibility that I may be wrong. Still, if God does exists, that would mean that the universe might very well exist for a reason. There may very well be a purpose to life. Alternatively, if life has no purpose, one could draw the conclusion that life is pointless. That is not the kind of life I choose to live. 

I think you should continue to reach the conclusion that makes the most sense to you. I will do the same. I have no quarrel with your conclusions, but I think your arguments need a bit of work. I encourage you to read and study and continue to make up your own mind.

Peace.

Thanks for the response. We are talking past one another. You frame the argument as "heads I win, tails you lose." You believe that I have to prove God exists, but you do not have to prove God does not. Yours is a circular argument. You attempt to prove that you are correct by asserting that you are correct and denying the validity of other arguments. Logical fallacies do not produce valid arguments.

You keep arguing against Theism. That is not Deism. I have stated my arguments. I stand behind them. Come back with a valid argument, and we can have a conversation.

I would ask one question. What motivates you to come into a Deist discussion forum to proselytize fundamentalist atheism? (your preferred capitalization)

Thank you. Too bad we do not seem to be capable of communicating. Maybe when I mature more I will achieve your level of knowledge and wisdom, and I too will know everything and be right about everything all the time. Hmm! Perhaps you are God! You seem to claim omniscience.

I bow to your superior intellect. Alas, I am no match.

Yours in faith,

Peace. Out.