Hello! I'm a Deist! Ask me anything!

[SteveVH]

I was born to two Catholic families … one devout, the other obligatory.

Very good. Have you ever practiced Catholicism? Have you ever studied the Catholic faith? The reason I ask is because there are a lot of folks who read these threads and you are representing yourself as a Catholic yet promoting ideas and beliefs that are completely contradictory to the Catholic faith. It’s kind of false advertising, if you catch my drift.

I don’t “receive authority”. I exist, and I speak. Amazing phenomenon.

But you said that you spoke “absolute truth”. That means that you speak infallibly of your own volition. Amazing phenomenon, indeed!

Technically, in the state of pre-existence, there is no god (as if god were an individual).

And you know this how?

There is consciousness (consciousness is something human beings do not fully understand) and there are thoughts.

Are you a human being? If so, then by your own admission you do not understand either. Yet you speak absolute truth.

The mind has faculties (imagination is not logic, reason is not memory, psyche is not consciousness). There is no person named god who knowingly, intentionally created atoms, molecules, lightning, brains. There’s just a container, that contains everything.

From where did the container come as well as the things contained within it?

Want to know what it’s like to talk to strangers about absolute truth and reality?

It happens every day right here on good ole’ CAF.

The trigger that causes me to explode, is about my daughter. You know, god and its creation. parent and child.

I think you need to seek some help. I will pray for you but this will be my last interaction with you on this forum.

God bless you.

Steve

 

[TypesAndShadows]

Hi Deist314!

On the off-chance that this is something you studied, what role do you think Hermeticism played in the 17th century rise of modern Deism? From what I’ve read, it played a significant role in the way the whole heliocentrism thing played out, so I’m interested in your thoughts and observations.

 

[drac16]

Hello, Deist.

Do you ever pray? why or why not?

 

[Deist314]

Hmm… If what you say is correct, then it appears that Deists know very little about the Fatima event.

But, if Deists have in fact investigated the Fatima event, there must be some papers or links to information that would “scientifically explain” the event.

1. The truth is that the events in Fatima defy all scientific explanations (how does a large field/region soaked by rain for several days dry out in 15 minutes? Simple math shows that to be very unscientific (conservation of energy).
2. Mass hysteria? Not so much - the event was across 600 square miles. People who had no idea that an event was predicted - and also were alone at the time - could not be affected by mass hysteria. (Why doesn’t mass hysteria happen more often - especially at rock concerts?)
3. Luck? 70,000 people looking at the sun for 15 minutes? They all somehow “lucked out” that their eyes were not permanently damaged?

For me, when I see people dismissing such large, overt, undeniable events like Fatima, I have to concluded that the whole basis for the beliefs of Deists to be remarkable thin.

There certainly is!!! Give a moment to provide some for you!

Joe Nickell wrote on this subject in Skeptical Inquirer Volume 33.6 and Auguste Meessen followed the same reasoning. You can find information about his take on this subject by looking up the talk he gave at the Science, Religion and Conscience International Forum. I believe the talk was titled Apparitions of the Sun? Addititonally research has been done into this event and has found that not all of the people there that day witnessed the same thing. Some claimed only to see the dancing while other saw just the colors and there were even some that saw nothing at all. Stanley Jaki does a great job of discussing this even in his book God and the Sun at Fátima. The most commonly accepted theory behind the events of Fatima is that they witnessed a sundog. Once again Joe Nickell discusses this more indepth in his book Looking for a Miracle: Weeping Icons, Relics, Stigmata, Visions, and Healing Cures. Paul Simmons supports Nickell in his 2005 Times article* Weather Secrets of Miracle at Fátima*. I believe that many if not all of these sources would give you the take a typical deist would have on the events of Fatima.

Hi Deist314!

On the off-chance that this is something you studied, what role do you think Hermeticism played in the 17th century rise of modern Deism? From what I’ve read, it played a significant role in the way the whole heliocentrism thing played out, so I’m interested in your thoughts and observations.

I will admit that Hermeticism is not something I’ve studied in depth but the surface study I’ve done have lead me to believe that Hermeticism had a very little role in the rise of modern Deism. I can certainly see it being a contributing factor, among other things, but not a prevalent force. There are parallels between the two belief systems but its important to remember that deism can’t be traced back to one culture or source as deistic thought has appeared in almost every culture we have records of. Hermeticism is one of these avenues of deistic thought.

Hello, Deist.

Do you ever pray? why or why not?

Hello Drac!!!

I personally pray but it is not a habit that is universal among deists. Whether or not a deist prays is largely dependent on where they came from before becoming deists. Those, like myself, who were raised in one of the Abrahamic Traditions tend to pray while those from Agnostic or Atheistic backgrounds tend not to. Now while I do pray, it is different from how Christians pray. In their prayer there always tends to be some form of supplication, asking God for something. My prayer is one of thanks. I find it meaningless to ask for things because the Creator does not interfere in he Universe but I do enjoy prayers of thanks as a way of meditation and grounding myself.

usefulcharts.com/religion/oldest-bible-manuscripts.html

A very neat little chart, I would be interested in seeing the sources for that list. Additionally I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your chart supports my statement that the earliest complete copy of the Gospels is placed somewhere in the 4th Century. Before that we have nothing bu snippets, portions, and quotations.

Thank you all for the responses!!! Its nice to see others taking an interest in my beliefs!

 

[Per_Crucem]

A very neat little chart, I would be interested in seeing the sources for that list.

You could investigate each document online, I would imagine.

Additionally I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your chart supports my statement that the earliest complete copy of the Gospels is placed somewhere in the 4th Century. Before that we have nothing bu snippets, portions, and quotations.

There are a myriad number of reasons for that which have nothing to do with the authenticity of the documents themselves. Scripture in the early church was primarily liturgical, so there was no pressing reason to have a complete compilation. In addition, Roman persecution made such an idea unfeasable anyway. You point to the 4th century and it’s not surprising considering Christianity was not legal in Rome until then. Outside of the documents themselves, the church fathers own statements, in taken together, over a three hundred year period, recreates 90% of the NT.

The original documents themselves go back to the first century, within the lifetime of the apostles.

 

[in_servitude]

There certainly is!!! Give a moment to provide some for you!

Joe Nickell wrote on this subject in Skeptical Inquirer Volume 33.6 and Auguste Meessen followed the same reasoning. You can find information about his take on this subject by looking up the talk he gave at the Science, Religion and Conscience International Forum. I believe the talk was titled Apparitions of the Sun? Addititonally research has been done into this event and has found that not all of the people there that day witnessed the same thing. Some claimed only to see the dancing while other saw just the colors and there were even some that saw nothing at all. Stanley Jaki does a great job of discussing this even in his book God and the Sun at Fátima. The most commonly accepted theory behind the events of Fatima is that they witnessed a sundog. Once again Joe Nickell discusses this more indepth in his book Looking for a Miracle: Weeping Icons, Relics, Stigmata, Visions, and Healing Cures. Paul Simmons supports Nickell in his 2005 Times article* Weather Secrets of Miracle at Fátima*. I believe that many if not all of these sources would give you the take a typical deist would have on the events of Fatima.

A sun dog? I know what a sun dog is - and the accounts of those in Fatima do not align - at all - with a sun dog. People do not think that the sun is coming down on top of them and that they are about to die because of a sun dog.

Sun dogs do not dry up a rain soak field/region in 15 minutes.

Also, the very fact that people report DIFFERENT experiences debunks the scientific theory. It doesn’t take much thought to realize that a sun dancing in the sky can’t physically do that in a limited region of the planet. The natural explanation would require that it dance for the whole planet. But, if it did actually physically dance - the orbit of the planets would be destroyed. It was a spiritual experience - which is why I pulled that event into the discussion. Deists apparently must deny that events at Fatima happened. I do not envy your situation!

**Anyway, you answered my question - and I appreciate that. ** Since Deists must deny the events at Fatima, then there is an attempt to discredit the remarkable and undeniable events at Fatima. Those individuals who attempt to create a nature-only explanation for the events in Fatima on October 13, 1917 absolutely must discount the vast evidence in opposition to their theories.

By the way, there were miracles on:
May 13, 1917 - witnessed by 3 children
June 13, 1917 - witnessed by a couple dozen people
July 13, 1917 - witnessed by thousands
August 13, 1917 - the children were put in jail, but there was still a minor miracle showing that the children’s absence was an issue. Many more thousands were present.
September 13, 1917 - witnessed by 40,000 people

And, they were not all the same either. Each miracle was different.

You see, the children said that a miracle would happen, people show up - see a miracle - and then report what they saw to their friends and family. That is why there was such rapid growth in the audience. That is why the atheist/communist government tried to put a stop to it by kidnapping and mentally torturing children.

When I hear the explanation of sun dog - I am honestly flabbergasted. Clearly, people speak with authority on a subject they actually know nothing about. Seriously, even if it was just a sun dog (which I still find silly), one would have to ask how in the world children knew something so odd appear at that particular moment. Then, there is the odd coinkydink that there were so many confirming miracles showing up right on que for the previous 4 months.

However, you have answered my question - and I do want to express my appreciation for that. Thanks!

 

[Deist314]

There are a myriad number of reasons for that which have nothing to do with the authenticity of the documents themselves. Scripture in the early church was primarily liturgical, so there was no pressing reason to have a complete compilation. In addition, Roman persecution made such an idea unfeasible anyway. You point to the 4th century and it’s not surprising considering Christianity was not legal in Rome until then. Outside of the documents themselves, the church fathers own statements, in taken together, over a three hundred year period, recreates 90% of the NT.

The original documents themselves go back to the first century, within the lifetime of the apostles.

Exactly but I am not arguing for the authenticity of the documents themselves, I’m saying can we really expect a document to be rewritten and shared across a multitude of cultures and languages without undergoing ANY changes at all?

And yes it was primarily liturgical and that is my point! Have you ever played the children’s game called Telephone? If not, and in case any are reading that have not, I’ll briefly summarize. The game usually involves anywhere of 10+ people and starts with the first person thinking of a word or phrase. This person then passes it on to the next person who passes it to the next person and so on until it reaches the final participant. This person then says what they were told allowed in order to see if it matches what the first person said. As can be imagined, it is extremely difficult for this game to be completed successfully. Now lets multiply this effect across millions of people speaking different langues and living in different cultures spread across two thousand years. If you can see where I am going then you can understand why I have problems with the Bible which holds that each and every word to be authentic and the unequivocal truth even though there is a multitude of scholastic evidence that shows changes were made to the Bible as it moved through the ages.

It is not just Christianity that has this problem as well, the same issues are prevalent in Judaism, Islam, and Buddhism. Its just something we have to deal with because these religions were founded in a time when people were more likely to pass something along by word of mouth than text

Also, the Roman persecution of Christians was sporadic and ad-hoc at best. More often than not the Roman government had nothing to do with the persecution of Christians because they simply didn’t care. The people responsible were the individuals within the communities that Christians dwelt. There was a brief time, under Nero, when they were persecuted by the Imperial government but that ended at the time of Nero’s death. After that there was nothing that could be called Imperial persecution until the reign of Decius. Between these two eras the persecution was largely accusatory and not inquisitive. The government only intervened when charges were filed against Christians by members in the community and then, more often than not, we set free with no punishments. I would direct you to a few texts for further study on this subject if you choose! Geoffrey Croix’s Why Were Early Christians Persecuted is an excellent book that covers this issue as well as Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church by W.H.C. Frend. I would also suggest looking into the work of Timothy Barnes and his study of the Tertullian.

And I am not pointing to the 4th century. Your sources are. The simple fact is that we have no complete copies of the Gospels until this time period when we obviously have proof that some attempt was made to write them down in the centuries before. And just comparing the earliest complete copies with the fragments of the earlier copies we can see there are differences in them. I am sorry but you are getting into an area of biblical history that is extremely complex. There are people who spend their entire lives devoted to nothing besides the differences between the Gospels and their evolution, some who even focus their entire academic career on the differences within a single Gospel.

I would ask we move on from this subject because we are venturing into waters that many people find upsetting and has very little to do with Deistic belief.

 

[Deist314]

A sun dog? I know what a sun dog is - and the accounts of those in Fatima do not align - at all - with a sun dog. People do not think that the sun is coming down on top of them and that they are about to die because of a sun dog.

Sun dogs do not dry up a rain soak field/region in 15 minutes.

Also, the very fact that people report DIFFERENT experiences debunks the scientific theory. It doesn’t take much thought to realize that a sun dancing in the sky can’t physically do that in a limited region of the planet. The natural explanation would require that it dance for the whole planet. But, if it did actually physically dance - the orbit of the planets would be destroyed. It was a spiritual experience - which is why I pulled that event into the discussion. Deists apparently must deny that events at Fatima happened. I do not envy your situation!

**Anyway, you answered my question - and I appreciate that. ** Since Deists must deny the events at Fatima, then there is an attempt to discredit the remarkable and undeniable events at Fatima. Those individuals who attempt to create a nature-only explanation for the events in Fatima on October 13, 1917 absolutely must discount the vast evidence in opposition to their theories.

By the way, there were miracles on:
May 13, 1917 - witnessed by 3 children
June 13, 1917 - witnessed by a couple dozen people
July 13, 1917 - witnessed by thousands
August 13, 1917 - the children were put in jail, but there was still a minor miracle showing that the children’s absence was an issue. Many more thousands were present.
September 13, 1917 - witnessed by 40,000 people

And, they were not all the same either. Each miracle was different.

You see, the children said that a miracle would happen, people show up - see a miracle - and then report what they saw to their friends and family. That is why there was such rapid growth in the audience. That is why the atheist/communist government tried to put a stop to it by kidnapping and mentally torturing children.

When I hear the explanation of sun dog - I am honestly flabbergasted. Clearly, people speak with authority on a subject they actually know nothing about. Seriously, even if it was just a sun dog (which I still find silly), one would have to ask how in the world children knew something so odd appear at that particular moment. Then, there is the odd coinkydink that there were so many confirming miracles showing up right on que for the previous 4 months.

However, you have answered my question - and I do want to express my appreciation for that. Thanks!

I would just like to say I appreciate you contributing to my thread and I can see the logic behind your argument!!! If you have any other questions regarding deist beliefs feel free to ask!

 

[Per_Crucem]

Exactly but I am not arguing for the authenticity of the documents themselves, I’m saying can we really expect a document to be rewritten and shared across a multitude of cultures and languages without undergoing ANY changes at all?

What changes? There are over 6000 copies of the NT documents from the ancient world. The differentation between them is about 1% and these affect no major Christian doctrine. So no one is arguing the changes are non-existent. Their importance, however, is negligible.

And yes it was primarily liturgical and that is my point! Have you ever played the children’s game called Telephone? If not, and in case any are reading that have not, I’ll briefly summarize. The game usually involves anywhere of 10+ people and starts with the first person thinking of a word or phrase. This person then passes it on to the next person who passes it to the next person and so on until it reaches the final participant. This person then says what they were told allowed in order to see if it matches what the first person said. As can be imagined, it is extremely difficult for this game to be completed successfully. Now lets multiply this effect across millions of people speaking different langues and living in different cultures spread across two thousand years. If you can see where I am going then you can understand why I have problems with the Bible which holds that each and every word to be authentic and the unequivocal truth even though there is a multitude of scholastic evidence that shows changes were made to the Bible as it moved through the ages.

I’ve heard this argument before. Again, skeptics have yet to identify and point to specific changes to copies in the NT, such that would rule out their authenticity. It’s all well and good to accuse the church of having played telephone with the NT documents. But when there’s no evidence that it happened, it makes the argument a bit absurd. Even an atheist like Bart Ehrman knows this.

Also, the Roman persecution of Christians was sporadic and ad-hoc at best. More often than not the Roman government had nothing to do with the persecution of Christians because they simply didn’t care. The people responsible were the individuals within the communities that Christians dwelt. There was a brief time, under Nero, when they were persecuted by the Imperial government but that ended at the time of Nero’s death. After that there was nothing that could be called Imperial persecution until the reign of Decius. Between these two eras the persecution was largely accusatory and not inquisitive. The government only intervened when charges were filed against Christians by members in the community and then, more often than not, we set free with no punishments. I would direct you to a few texts for further study on this subject if you choose! Geoffrey Croix’s Why Were Early Christians Persecuted is an excellent book that covers this issue as well as Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church by W.H.C. Frend. I would also suggest looking into the work of Timothy Barnes and his study of the Tertullian.

Regardless of the scope of persecution, it still made the circulation of the NT letters very difficult. Your argument is pointing to not having full compilations of the gospels. What I am saying is there are reasons for that that have nothing to do with whether the documents are reliable. There are external factors there, Roman persecutions being one of them. Sure, it wasn’t continuous or maybe even that large scale. But it was still illegal (especially under certain emperors like Diocletian). Add to that fact the difficulty of travel, copying by hand, etc.

And I am not pointing to the 4th century. Your sources are. The simple fact is that we have no complete copies of the Gospels until this time period when we obviously have proof that some attempt was made to write them down in the centuries before. And just comparing the earliest complete copies with the fragments of the earlier copies we can see there are differences in them.

Like what? An assertion is not an argument.

 

[Deist314]

What changes? There are over 6000 copies of the NT documents from the ancient world. The differentation between them is about 1% and these affect no major Christian doctrine. So no one is arguing the changes are non-existent. Their importance, however, is negligible.

I’ve heard this argument before. Again, skeptics have yet to identify and point to specific changes to copies in the NT, such that would rule out their authenticity. It’s all well and good to accuse the church of having played telephone with the NT documents. But when there’s no evidence that it happened, it makes the argument a bit absurd. Even an atheist like Bart Ehrman knows this.

Regardless of the scope of persecution, it still made the circulation of the NT letters very difficult. Your argument is pointing to not having full compilations of the gospels. What I am saying is there are reasons for that that have nothing to do with whether the documents are reliable. There are external factors there, Roman persecutions being one of them. Sure, it wasn’t continuous or maybe even that large scale. But it was still illegal (especially under certain emperors like Diocletian). Add to that fact the difficulty of travel, copying by hand, etc.

Like what? An assertion is not an argument.

At this point we are not discussing anything that has to do with Deism. We are entering a discussion on Biblical History, a subject I tried to stay away from for precisely this reason. If you would like to continue this discussion in private via PM or email I would be more than willing to do so! I am trying to keep this thread on topic with subjects that relate directly to deism and these topics do not.

 

[meltzerboy]

There certainly is!!! Give a moment to provide some for you!

Joe Nickell wrote on this subject in Skeptical Inquirer Volume 33.6 and Auguste Meessen followed the same reasoning. You can find information about his take on this subject by looking up the talk he gave at the Science, Religion and Conscience International Forum. I believe the talk was titled Apparitions of the Sun? Addititonally research has been done into this event and has found that not all of the people there that day witnessed the same thing. Some claimed only to see the dancing while other saw just the colors and there were even some that saw nothing at all. Stanley Jaki does a great job of discussing this even in his book God and the Sun at Fátima. The most commonly accepted theory behind the events of Fatima is that they witnessed a sundog. Once again Joe Nickell discusses this more indepth in his book Looking for a Miracle: Weeping Icons, Relics, Stigmata, Visions, and Healing Cures. Paul Simmons supports Nickell in his 2005 Times article* Weather Secrets of Miracle at Fátima*. I believe that many if not all of these sources would give you the take a typical deist would have on the events of Fatima.

I will admit that Hermeticism is not something I’ve studied in depth but the surface study I’ve done have lead me to believe that Hermeticism had a very little role in the rise of modern Deism. I can certainly see it being a contributing factor, among other things, but not a prevalent force. There are parallels between the two belief systems but its important to remember that deism can’t be traced back to one culture or source as deistic thought has appeared in almost every culture we have records of. Hermeticism is one of these avenues of deistic thought.

Hello Drac!!!

I personally pray but it is not a habit that is universal among deists. Whether or not a deist prays is largely dependent on where they came from before becoming deists. Those, like myself, who were raised in one of the Abrahamic Traditions tend to pray while those from Agnostic or Atheistic backgrounds tend not to. Now while I do pray, it is different from how Christians pray. In their prayer there always tends to be some form of supplication, asking God for something. My prayer is one of thanks. I find it meaningless to ask for things because the Creator does not interfere in he Universe but I do enjoy prayers of thanks as a way of meditation and grounding myself.

You are spamming. The purpose of this thread is to ask questions regarding my faith. So far you have not asked a single question and when directly asked to stop posting in this thread have refused to do so. To that end I feel the need to inform you that I have contacted a moderator and asked for intervention.

A very neat little chart, I would be interested in seeing the sources for that list. Additionally I would like to draw your attention to the fact that your chart supports my statement that the earliest complete copy of the Gospels is placed somewhere in the 4th Century. Before that we have nothing bu snippets, portions, and quotations.

Thank you all for the responses!!! Its nice to see others taking an interest in my beliefs!

It is not correct to state that when Christians pray it is always a prayer of supplication. This is certainly incorrect with regard to Judaism and, I would imagine, Islam as well. There are about half a dozen different kinds of prayers in these religions, and prayers of thanksgiving and adoration are abundant.

 

[Deist314]

It is not correct to state that when Christians pray it is always a prayer of supplication. This is certainly incorrect with regard to Judaism and, I would imagine, Islam as well. There are about half a dozen different kinds of prayers in these religions, and prayers of thanksgiving and adoration are abundant.

You are correct, there are a multitude of different types of prayer! While supplication may not always be the main focus of prayer it is often included in the closing lines or at the beginning.

 

[gmx2014]

Hmm… If what you say is correct, then it appears that Deists know very little about the Fatima event.

But, if Deists have in fact investigated the Fatima event, there must be some papers or links to information that would “scientifically explain” the event.

1. The truth is that the events in Fatima defy all scientific explanations (how does a large field/region soaked by rain for several days dry out in 15 minutes? Simple math shows that to be very unscientific (conservation of energy).
2. Mass hysteria? Not so much - the event was across 600 square miles. People who had no idea that an event was predicted - and also were alone at the time - could not be affected by mass hysteria. (Why doesn’t mass hysteria happen more often - especially at rock concerts?)
3. Luck? 70,000 people looking at the sun for 15 minutes? They all somehow “lucked out” that their eyes were not permanently damaged?

For me, when I see people dismissing such large, overt, undeniable events like Fatima, I have to concluded that the whole basis for the beliefs of Deists to be remarkable thin.

That’s called the Miracle of the Sun, right? I LOVE that event. It’s magnificent.

 

[gmx2014]

Very good. Have you ever practiced Catholicism? Have you ever studied the Catholic faith? The reason I ask is because there are a lot of folks who read these threads and you are representing yourself as a Catholic yet promoting ideas and beliefs that are completely contradictory to the Catholic faith. It’s kind of false advertising, if you catch my drift.

But you said that you spoke “absolute truth”. That means that you speak infallibly of your own volition. Amazing phenomenon, indeed!

And you know this how?

Are you a human being? If so, then by your own admission you do not understand either. Yet you speak absolute truth.

From where did the container come as well as the things contained within it?

It happens every day right here on good ole’ CAF.

I think you need to seek some help. I will pray for you but this will be my last interaction with you on this forum.

God bless you.

Steve

The problem with some Catholics is that they don’t realize they’re stuffed into a brain box, which they can’t think or know outside of. It’s their restrictive path, one they’ve chosen, believing it’s the only way for them to be safe, and know God.

I understand consciousness much better than others I’ve interacted with. Consciousness is not a product of the human brain and is not dependent on a human brain in order to exist. Consciousness exists before the universe itself does, and there are conscious beings who exist. People cannot understand how a being can exist without a body and without a brain and so I get flippant, rude remarks … like the one you’ve made.

 

[gmx2014]

You are spamming. The purpose of this thread is to ask questions regarding my faith. So far you have not asked a single question and when directly asked to stop posting in this thread have refused to do so. To that end I feel the need to inform you that I have contacted a moderator and asked for intervention.

Actually, you’re a brand new person on this site with a smug smile on your face wanting to be interviewed about yourself and your beliefs. Don’t you question why your arrival drew out mine? Perfect timing. I haven’t been around for a while. I came back on the very same day that you signed up here. you look like the spammer, newbie.

 

[SteveVH]

The problem with some Catholics is that they don’t realize they’re stuffed into a brain box, which they can’t think or know outside of. It’s their restrictive path, one they’ve chosen, believing it’s the only way for them to be safe, and know God.

I understand consciousness much better than others I’ve interacted with. Consciousness is not a product of the human brain and is not dependent on a human brain in order to exist. Consciousness exists before the universe itself does, and there are conscious beings who exist. People cannot understand how a being can exist without a body and without a brain and so I get flippant, rude remarks … like the one you’ve made.

Gotcha.

 

[benhur]

Exactly but I am not arguing for the authenticity of the documents themselves, I’m saying can we really expect a document to be rewritten and shared across a multitude of cultures and languages without undergoing ANY changes at all?

And yes it was primarily liturgical and that is my point! Have you ever played the children’s game called Telephone? If not, and in case any are reading that have not, I’ll briefly summarize. The game usually involves anywhere of 10+ people and starts with the first person thinking of a word or phrase. This person then passes it on to the next person who passes it to the next person and so on until it reaches the final participant. This person then says what they were told allowed in order to see if it matches what the first person said. As can be imagined, it is extremely difficult for this game to be completed successfully. Now lets multiply this effect across millions of people speaking different langues and living in different cultures spread across two thousand years. If you can see where I am going then you can understand why I have problems with the Bible which holds that each and every word to be authentic and the unequivocal truth even though there is a multitude of scholastic evidence that shows changes were made to the Bible as it moved through the ages.
And I am not pointing to the 4th century. Your sources are. The simple fact is that we have no complete copies of the Gospels until this time period when we obviously have proof that some attempt was made to write them down in the centuries before. And just comparing the earliest complete copies with the fragments of the earlier copies we can see there are differences in them. I am sorry but you are getting into an area of biblical history that is extremely complex. There are people who spend their entire lives devoted to nothing besides the differences between the Gospels and their evolution, some who even focus their entire academic career on the differences within a single Gospel.
I would ask we move on from this subject because we are venturing into waters that many people find upsetting and has very little to do with Deistic belief.

Well then for the others may it be said the cup is not half empty but half full and even better .The Bible is the best documented ancient "literature " we have. It is more surprisingly cohesive than it is not. I have also played the telephone game and you know what,* once in a while the last utterance is exactly the same as the first.* However, the bible does require faith in an active Godhead to “see” beyond apparent “problems” with His Book, and purposely so (lest some be saved, without any inner change, not a “how to” book or a cook book).* The Bible is more like a diary or a love letter, where intimate, personal knowledge of the writer makes all the difference.*

 

[James82]

I have no questions for you, I’ve informed you. If you want to know and understand the origin of the universe, and the so-called creators, then you should know the most important piece of it: nothing (also called nothingness, pre-existence).

Hello,

Are you dealing with a substance abuse/addiction problem? I say this with all sincerity. Your posts are filled with non-sequitur’s which is a hallmark of someone who is mentally unstable or under the influence of a drug.

 

[Deist314]

Actually, you’re a brand new person on this site with a smug smile on your face wanting to be interviewed about yourself and your beliefs. Don’t you question why your arrival drew out mine? Perfect timing. I haven’t been around for a while. I came back on the very same day that you signed up here. you look like the spammer, newbie.

At this point you are resulting to personal attacks against myself and spamming this thread once again. I would encourage the rest of the people who wish to contribute to this thread to ignore gmx2014 as they have proven they do not wish to add to this discussion in a meaningful way. Once again, you have been reported and a moderator has been contacted.

 

[benhur]

Hmm… If what you say is correct, then it appears that Deists know very little about the Fatima event.

But, if Deists have in fact investigated the Fatima event, there must be some papers or links to information that would “scientifically explain” the event.

1. The truth is that the events in Fatima defy all scientific explanations (how does a large field/region soaked by rain for several days dry out in 15 minutes? Simple math shows that to be very unscientific (conservation of energy).
2. Mass hysteria? Not so much - the event was across 600 square miles. People who had no idea that an event was predicted - and also were alone at the time - could not be affected by mass hysteria. (Why doesn’t mass hysteria happen more often - especially at rock concerts?)
3. Luck? 70,000 people looking at the sun for 15 minutes? They all somehow “lucked out” that their eyes were not permanently damaged?

For me, when I see people dismissing such large, overt, undeniable events like Fatima, I have to concluded that the whole basis for the beliefs of Deists to be remarkable thin.

It is like such events are this or that ( good or bad), both on the supernatural side, and diests say neither but lets us find out what it is,with restrictions ( but leave out the supernatural). No one is free. Deists are not free to believe it to be supernatural. Many are not free to believe it is of God. Many are not free to believe it is from the Deceiver. May we be slaves to the Truth ( and be set free?).