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

[Gorgias]

Deist314:

However, if you would like to continue this discussion feel free to shoot me a pm and we can talk more there!

Thanks for the invitation. However, in the case of public claims being made I prefer all replies/rebuttals remain public.

There does seem to be quite a bit of interest in the topic! And, despite Deist314’s objection, I think I would assert that the question of the reliability of the Gospels is critical to the question of whether Deism is tenable as a philosophy: after all, in order to claim that God created the universe and then stepped away, one would have to fashion a response to those who claim that God, in fact, sent His son, and that the Scriptures – the NT in particular – is the account which the community who experienced that contact with the Son of God wrote in order to document their experience.

Perhaps a new thread – “Why I, as I Deist, cannot accept the New Testament”…?

 

[Gorgias]

Hi, Deist314! Welcome to the forums!

I know you mentioned that you’re a bit overwhelmed by all the questions; yet, let me throw this one out there, and if you get the chance to respond, I’d be interested in knowing your reaction:

Deist314:

I personally believe that there is a soul and there is an afterlife. Whether or not it is a traditional Heaven is open to debate but I do believe that people will be rewarded and punished for their actions and intents.

The belief in a soul and an afterlife seems antithetical to the notion of a God who does not involve himself at all with his creation. I’d never considered the question before, but your statement here gave me the opportunity to think a bit more deeply than I’d ever done before on this question…

We are created, as physical animals, by virtue of our parents’ reproductive activity: the physical being that I am, began with physical material from my father and physical material from my mother. Yet, my soul is not something that I gained from my parents; it is something immaterial. Some (including the Catholic Church) asserts that the soul is created immediately (i.e., without mediation) by God when the person is physically conceived; others have claimed that all the souls of all the people who will ever live were created in the beginning, and simply wait in some cosmic “Green Room” until their physical bodies come into existence. Both notions seem to contradict the tenets of Deism – on one hand, if souls are being created ‘in time’, as it were, then we’re explicitly saying that the Creator continues to interact with His human creation on an on-going basis. On the other hand, if we suggest that all souls were created in the beginning of creation (and thus, seemingly allowing a preservation of Deist belief), then we still have the problem of how souls become associated with ‘their’ bodies; that association, happening (as it were) ‘in time’ becomes yet another instance of God’s on-going interaction with His creation! Or, perhaps there’s a third option you’d like to propose?

Secondly, then, a Deist belief in an afterlife seems problematic. Is it that Deists believe that God does not interact with his creation at all, or merely within the scope of this material universe? If the former, then heaven is quite problematic – how would a Deist conceive of a heaven that exists without interaction with God? If the latter, then a different serious question arises: what is it that would lead us to believe that God does want to interact with us, but just not down here on earth? What logic gives rise to such a position, and why is it convincing?

In short: notions of ‘soul’ and ‘afterlife’ seem to violate the Deist tenet of divine non-interference, if I understand it correctly. What say you?

 

[SteveVH]

Hi, Deist314! Welcome to the forums!

I know you mentioned that you’re a bit overwhelmed by all the questions; yet, let me throw this one out there, and if you get the chance to respond, I’d be interested in knowing your reaction:

The belief in a soul and an afterlife seems antithetical to the notion of a God who does not involve himself at all with his creation. I’d never considered the question before, but your statement here gave me the opportunity to think a bit more deeply than I’d ever done before on this question…

We are created, as physical animals, by virtue of our parents’ reproductive activity: the physical being that I am, began with physical material from my father and physical material from my mother. Yet, my soul is not something that I gained from my parents; it is something immaterial. Some (including the Catholic Church) asserts that the soul is created immediately (i.e., without mediation) by God when the person is physically conceived; others have claimed that all the souls of all the people who will ever live were created in the beginning, and simply wait in some cosmic “Green Room” until their physical bodies come into existence. Both notions seem to contradict the tenets of Deism – on one hand, if souls are being created ‘in time’, as it were, then we’re explicitly saying that the Creator continues to interact with His human creation on an on-going basis. On the other hand, if we suggest that all souls were created in the beginning of creation (and thus, seemingly allowing a preservation of Deist belief), then we still have the problem of how souls become associated with ‘their’ bodies; that association, happening (as it were) ‘in time’ becomes yet another instance of God’s on-going interaction with His creation! Or, perhaps there’s a third option you’d like to propose?

Secondly, then, a Deist belief in an afterlife seems problematic. Is it that Deists believe that God does not interact with his creation at all, or merely within the scope of this material universe? If the former, then heaven is quite problematic – how would a Deist conceive of a heaven that exists without interaction with God? If the latter, then a different serious question arises: what is it that would lead us to believe that God does want to interact with us, but just not down here on earth? What logic gives rise to such a position, and why is it convincing?

In short: notions of ‘soul’ and ‘afterlife’ seem to violate the Deist tenet of divine non-interference, if I understand it correctly. What say you?

Great question!

 

[Gorgias]

Gorgias:

In short: notions of ‘soul’ and ‘afterlife’ seem to violate the Deist tenet of divine non-interference, if I understand it correctly. What say you?

Great question!

Thanks! Deist314 hasn’t been around CAF since last Wednesday, though… hopefully he didn’t get bored and decide to leave us!