Deism

[kill9]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism
http://www.answers.com/topic/deism

Deism is a religious and philosophical belief that a supreme natural God exists and created the physical universe, and that religious truths can be arrived at by the application of reason and observation of the natural world.

Deists asserted that reason could find evidence of God in nature and that God had created the world and then left it to operate under the natural laws he had devised.

______________

This is what I believe in..

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Creationism minus the miracles. How pessimistic!

There's no logic to stand on(any action a god takes that god would know the eternal repercussions of, omniscient and omnipotent, freewill would therefore be BS, and *immutable* fate/destiny is the only truth). Kind of reminds me of the Hindu caste system.

But enjoy your faith, for whatever it's worth.

 

[kill9]

Creationism exists in the bible. Deism does not follow the "God created the earth in 6 days and rested on the 7th". We dont follow anything in the bible whatsoever.

Is it not far fetched to assume that God knows the multiple choices layed out before you, but do not know which you will take?

 

[TeaTreeOil]

What do you follow?

Why is it that all gods appear to inherit the fallacies of those [humans] which created them?

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Surely, you're not stereotyped by Wikipedia articles/<insert website here>???

 

[kill9]

What do you follow?

Why is it that all gods appear to inherit the fallacies of those [humans] which created them?

What do I follow? Just the belief that there is a God in the heavens, but truly loves us regardless of our choices, as our time on earth is a but a blip in eternity. I'm not even going to speak of "punishment" in the afterlife because that's only for God to decide. God would not create a puzzle(religion) for you to love him.

It is insulting God's intelligence to say that anyone speaks for him or any religion does.

What fallacies does he inherit in Deism?

Thank you for showing disagreeable respect.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

What is love? If you don't mind me asking.

I don't see how an eternity(infinity) of ANYTHING(heaven vs hell, for instance) is justified by a finite amount of 'humanly imperfect' actions. For instance, infinity divided by any finite amount is still infinity. And conversely a finite number divided by infinity is always zero(or converges, as calculus would dictate).

Deism would not necessarily mean an afterlife, as far as my understanding of it goes.

Fallacies are numerous. Simply the existence of a being with infinite attributes in a finite universe is the biggest problem I see. Occam's razor is another, that is the simplest explanation is typically the correct one.... Adding these seemingly impossible attributes where they need not be attributed to attain the identical result.

There would also seem to be no [surprise] reaction to his creation(s). That is, a god would have known what would have resulted from his creations. He'd see it and say, "Oh, that's how I intended it to be. I created it will full omniscience, after all."

The typically theistic response to this is, "well, God designed it so he'd not know and you'd have free will."

And my only response is, "so why call him a god?"

NOTE: I always use "a god"/"gods", there are THOUSANDS of them(at least claims). The term 'God' should be replaceable by a proper name(Allah, etc). When 'a god'/'gods' is replaceable with any classification(a dog, a cat, a human, dogs, cats, humans, etc.)

 

[kill9]

What is love? If you don't mind me asking.

a mixture of brain chemicals induced when you feel certain things.

I don't see how an eternity(infinity) of ANYTHING(heaven vs hell, for instance) is justified by a finite amount of 'humanly imperfect' actions. For instance, infinity divided by any finite amount is still infinity. And conversely a finite number divided by infinity is always zero(or converges, as calculus would dictate).

Infinity is Infinity, but even in space only, there is certain stages and transitions of the universe.

Deism would not necessarily mean an afterlife, as far as my understanding of it goes.

Not necessarily, but we are all afraid of what happens after death.

Fallacies are numerous. Simply the existence of a being with infinite attributes in a finite universe is the biggest problem I see. Occam's razor is another, that is the simplest explanation is typically the correct one.... Adding these seemingly impossible attributes where they need not be attributed to attain the identical result.

There would also seem to be no [surprise] reaction to his creation(s). That is, a god would have known what would have resulted from his creations. He'd see it and say, "Oh, that's how I intended it to be. I created it will full omniscience, after all."

The typically theistic response to this is, "well, God designed it so he'd not know and you'd have free will."

God cannot design something and NOT know the possible outcomes. That is the purpose of design. However, the human mind is powerful but incredibly simplistic at the same time. Emotions control the vast of us and based on your experiences on earth, of your choice or not. If negativity makes you negative, or if you are above it and continue to put one foot in front of the other.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

a mixture of brain chemicals induced when you feel certain things.

So a god must have a brain to love his creations? But brains are physical.... So you believe your god is also physical?

Infinity is Infinity, but even in space only, there is certain stages and transitions of the universe.

?

Not necessarily, but we are all afraid of what happens after death.

I don't fear death. Certainly not what happens after death. I see it as I will no longer have consciousness. My brains ceases to function.

God cannot design something and NOT know the possible outcomes. That is the purpose of design. However, the human mind is powerful but incredibly simplistic at the same time. Emotions control the vast of us and based on your experiences on earth, of your choice or not. If negativity makes you negative, or if you are above it and continue to put one foot in front of the other.

Simplistic? Compared to what? The brain is probably the most complex structure known.

In certain schools of Buddhism it is taught that attachment to unchanging atman(a term encompassing: eternal soul/spirit, self, and even ego) is a cause for misery and suffering.

Is this why you fear death? Uncertainty of the self or 'not self'.

 

[Volcanus]

Is it not far fetched to assume that God knows the multiple choices layed out before you, but do not know which you will take?

Sounds like a sucky deity if he isn't all knowing.

 

[kill9]

I was trying to engage in a intelligent conversation about it, but I don't like people mocking my beliefs.

Gonna bow out of this thread, peace.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

I was trying to engage in a intelligent conversation about it, but I don't like people mocking my beliefs.

Gonna bow out of this thread, peace.

Taking the easy out....

 

[poplars]

TeaTreeOil it seemed as if you were on the attack the whole time. He obviously wasn't looking for a debate, are you just one of those people who browses around looking for people to argue with?

 

[CrackerJax]

I'm pretty sure an all knowing G*D wouldn't create a world based on violence and literally eating each other to stay alive...the all knowing dude didn't like the idea of solar power as food? WTF? GTG... a Tiger is after my ass.



out.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Where did I attack him? I do have an interesting(unique) sense of humor/sarcasm/facetiousness.

I may be arguing against(challenging) what he believes, but that's my right. If one can't defend(or chooses not to) one's beliefs... that's not my problem. I don't think I attacked him personally. There's a clear distinction.

EDIT: He even states that he doesn't like people mocking his beliefs. Kind of funny, because *your* beliefs will certainly be mocked if *you* can't defend them.

 

[mexiblunt]

Seemed like a natural progression of a intelligent conversation to me, tho Naturally It would as I'm not even intelligent enough to understand everything that was posted butit was interesting. teetree did ask his beliefs but he did not need answer to have a intelligent conversation about the subject.

 

[kill9]

Where did I attack him? I do have an interesting(unique) sense of humor/sarcasm/facetiousness.

I may be arguing against(challenging) what he believes, but that's my right. If one can't defend(or chooses not to) one's beliefs... that's not my problem. I don't think I attacked him personally. There's a clear distinction.

EDIT: He even states that he doesn't like people mocking his beliefs. Kind of funny, because *your* beliefs will certainly be mocked if *you* can't defend them.

I sensed your humor and sarcasm, which is why I sincerely said thanks for the disagreeable respect.

However, I don't put up with retarded quips like Volcanus gave me.

I'm here to engage in a man-to-man conversation about this, children need not apply.

So a god must have a brain to love his creations? But brains are physical.... So you believe your god is also physical?

Please don't try to write for me.

We can argue for days on what is physical and whether or not God exists in a physical form. That is a question I simply do not know the answer to, as I've never seen God in his truest form.

But I do not need to see God, to feel the creation of love.

I don't fear death. Certainly not what happens after death. I see it as I will no longer have consciousness. My brains ceases to function.

I am certainly not afraid of death as well, but I believe we answer to God for our actions on earth.

Simplistic? Compared to what? The brain is probably the most complex structure known.

Of course it is the most complex structure known, supercomputers can't touch our brain.

We are incredibly simplistic as humans. Incredibly.

In certain schools of Buddhism it is taught that attachment to unchanging atman(a term encompassing: eternal soul/spirit, self, and even ego) is a cause for misery and suffering.

In no way or form am I saying that our beings do not change. But even Buddhists would agree that, in one form or another, our beings leave a mark on the universe.

If I don't want to put up with childish insults, I cannot defend my beliefs? Readjust your math.

 

[CrackerJax]

But I do not need to see God, to feel the creation of love.

That is true, one does not need to see to feel. Anything, not just love. Pretty sure blind people feel

I am certainly not afraid of death as well, but I believe we answer to God for our actions on earth.

Why? Since he already knows....some form of interrogation? Like a cop "where were you on your mother's birthday?" (hot light bores down on you in a smoke filled heaven room) "You know where I was". "Don't get smart"!

Of course it is the most complex structure known, supercomputers can't touch our brain.

We are incredibly simplistic as humans. Incredibly.

Those statements are in opposition of each other. Since the first one is correct......

In no way or form am I saying that our beings do not change. But even Buddhists would agree that, in one form or another, our beings leave a mark on the universe.

Agreeing on something unknown doesn't get you farther down the road I'm afraid. More honestly, it is better to simply say, "I don't know". No?

Do we really need to fill in the blanks with unknown variables to live a happy and kind life?

In one way, I have set up a win/win scenario for my non existent soul. If there is nothing as I suspect strongly...then poof no worries no nothing. If there is "something" after I perish, it will be a complete surprise better than any other since I've led a pretty good life but still don't kneel to a deity (since I don't believe I would be a hypocrite, there are lots of them). And if I perish and the whole heaven thing is an option but since I didn't accept Jesus I am excluded, I wouldn't want to be there anyways. Anything set up on something so vain and trivial is not a place I wish to hang out.

All things considered, all evidence examined, I feel confident that I need not worry about it. Atom dispersal awaits me and not much more. Anything else is my 'ego" talking (or some one else's).



out.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

I sensed your humor and sarcasm, which is why I sincerely said thanks for the disagreeable respect.

However, I don't put up with retarded quips like Volcanus gave me.

I'm here to engage in a man-to-man conversation about this, children need not apply.



Please don't try to write for me.

We can argue for days on what is physical and whether or not God exists in a physical form. That is a question I simply do not know the answer to, as I've never seen God in his truest form.

But I do not need to see God, to feel the creation of love.



I am certainly not afraid of death as well, but I believe we answer to God for our actions on earth.



Of course it is the most complex structure known, supercomputers can't touch our brain.

We are incredibly simplistic as humans. Incredibly.



In no way or form am I saying that our beings do not change. But even Buddhists would agree that, in one form or another, our beings leave a mark on the universe.

If I don't want to put up with childish insults, I cannot defend my beliefs? Readjust your math.

One man's humor is another man's retarded quips.

I'm not trying to write for you, merely understand you. I find people have wide and far stances on the topic of love. My interest was more-so along the lines of... do you think love can be passive?
Or must it be proactive?
What actions stem from love?
Can inaction be love, or must there be action?
Expression of love?

If a man and a woman never express their love for one another, and never act upon it, there'd seem to be no love. It'd just be a crush -infatuation -lust. I see one of the requisites for [true] love being mutuality. Both parties taking actions, both parties expressing their altruistic feelings, devotion, and reverence(not fear of them, but fear of not having them) for one another. Teared up a bit there, recalling all the loves I have lost. Bittersweetness.

But I do not need to believe there are any gods, to feel the creation of love.

Why would you feel you need to answer to anyone? Do your actions speak louder than words?

I'm not sure what you mean by humans being incredibly simple without putting it into context. Or perhaps I am missing something?

One of the most respectable quotes of Buddha I have found goes like this:

"Believe nothing on the faith of traditions,
even though they have been held in honor
for many generations and in diverse places.
Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it.
Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past.
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
persuading yourself that a God inspires you.
Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests.
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto."

 

[kill9]

One man's humor is another man's retarded quips.

Maybe, but I get the sense that people are trying to equate my belief in Deism to Christianity.

I'm not trying to write for you, merely understand you. I find people have wide and far stances on the topic of love. My interest was more-so along the lines of... do you think love can be passive?
Or must it be proactive?
What actions stem from love?
Can inaction be love, or must there be action?
Expression of love?

Inaction can definitely be a form a love, since it is a form of respect for another person. Inaction to petty comments that can destroy a person, or love that person for his/her imperfections.

Love is a diverse and beautiful thing, however even from love, hatred can be created. It was a combination of love and hatred that conquered Hitler.

If a man and a woman never express their love for one another, and never act upon it, there'd seem to be no love. It'd just be a crush -infatuation -lust. I see one of the requisites for [true] love being mutuality. Both parties taking actions, both parties expressing their altruistic feelings, devotion, and reverence(not fear of them, but fear of not having them) for one another. Teared up a bit there, recalling all the loves I have lost. Bittersweetness.

Lust and Love are a deadly combination. But I think we can all agree that lust is not entirely a bad thing. It is lust that drawed our parents together, and after seeing so many years of our parents being together, we can agree they have true love. Or not. I don't know your family personally but I'm not going to dig either.

But I do not need to believe there are any gods, to feel the creation of love.

Of course not,

Why would you feel you need to answer to anyone? Do your actions speak louder than words?

Actions do speak louder than words. I do not answer to "anyone" but my creator. No I am not some mass serial killer but even an innocent act of passion can leave a mark on a child of god. And thus change his/her perspective forever, and the virus spreads.

I'm not sure what you mean by humans being incredibly simple without putting it into context. Or perhaps I am missing something?

I kind of answered your question above.

One of the most respectable quotes of Buddha I have found goes like this:

"Believe nothing on the faith of traditions,
even though they have been held in honor
for many generations and in diverse places.
Do not believe a thing because many people speak of it.
Do not believe on the faith of the sages of the past.
Do not believe what you yourself have imagined,
persuading yourself that a God inspires you.
Believe nothing on the sole authority of your masters and priests.
After examination, believe what you yourself have tested
and found to be reasonable, and conform your conduct thereto."

Very honorable quote, I do respect the Buddhists tremendously as they are on the path to enlightenment.

But the funny thing is, I had a belief in Deism before I even know what it was. I was shocked to find "Deism" on the internet and books.

Now you can argue whether or not the planet earth has conditioned my beliefs indirectly or not to lead me to this point, but I do not believe in coincidences.

The only problem with Buddhism I have is the belief that sex is dirty and dishonorable, if that's the case, how did the Buddhists themselves be created?

There is a balance on planet earth. However, as someone else mentioned on this forum, we tend to savor, ponder about evil moreso than good.