World with Deism vs World with Christianity?

[BigV]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

 

[cvanwey]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

I would dare to say that the difference(s) between the two propositions (deism vs theism/Christianity) might be indistinguishable?

Maybe 'deism' is the real-deal, and since this time, we merely have many whom assert something more; as we humans have the ability to invent our own flavors/concepts/etc?

It's a question I have also asked before...

Does god create humans, and/or do humans create god? - (figuratively speaking of course...)

 

[hedrick]

To my knowledge deists reject revelation, but not necessarily God’s providence or his influence in human affairs. So it doesn’t necessarily change how the world works, except for a rejection of some forms of religion.

 

[eleos1954]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

Many deists do not believe in Jesus and that He is the savior. Many Deists do not believe of any kind of personal relationship with the creator (Jesus). Would also dismiss the trinity.

Various beliefs among deists.

 

[miknik5]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

The end of life as we know it...and nothing beyond it...and certainly no accountability to anybody...every man to and for himself...this certainly could lead to danger....which is what seems to be happening already....

Judges comes to mind....

 

[hedrick]

Deism seems less common than in the past (or at least less prominent, since it was probably never actually common).

It seems to have been an early part of the Enlightenment reaction against traditional religion, whose claims to revelation they regarded as unjustified.

While I share some of their concerns, it seems to me that there was an inherent problem. I don’t think you can actually know anything about God without some kind of revelation. If you believe that God acts in history, as many Deists did, then his acts become a kind of revelation. Indeed I would argue that that’s what the Bible is: a record of God’s acts in history. (Of course some of those acts involved content, e.g. Jesus’ preaching.)

Although there are still deists, I think to a large extent it has been replaced on one side by agnosticism and the other by people who accept revelation but approach Scripture critically and other claims to revelation skeptically.

 

[Silmarien]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

Christianity claims, in St. Augustine's words, that God made us for himself, so the sort of spiritual needs that have lead to countless different religions (and perhaps non-religious replacement ideologies as well) would really be expected. We seek higher meaning because we were made to do so.

In a deistic world, this wouldn't necessarily be the case. Perhaps we would have some sort of spiritual drive as an accident of evolution, but we could just have easily have never had any concept of God at all.

 

[Caliban]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

No hell...no bloody sacrifice...and less judgement from belivers.

 

[hedrick]

In a deistic world, this wouldn't necessarily be the case. Perhaps we would have some sort of spiritual drive as an accident of evolution, but we could just have easily have never had any concept of God at all.

Huh? Deism basically accepted "natural religion." They thought that nature taught their version of God. In a world where Deism is true, everyone would believe in God, but it might be a different kind of God.

 

[Caliban]

Huh? Deism basically accepted "natural religion." They thought that nature taught their version of God. In a world where Deism is true, everyone would believe in God, but it might be a different kind of God.

Isn't that similar to what people do now?

 

[Silmarien]

Huh? Deism basically accepted "natural religion." They thought that nature taught their version of God. In a world where Deism is true, everyone would believe in God, but it might be a different kind of God.

I don't think this is actually true, though, since OP is describing deism as the theory that God sets things in motion and then leaves us to our own devices. I tend to draw a distinction between philosophical theism, where revelation is rejected but God is still viewed as maintaining the universe, and the sort of deism that OP is talking about, where God literally just sets things in motion and then disappears. I don't take for granted that our cognitive abilities would have necessarily been the same in a world where God wasn't at all present, so I'm saying that it's the deistic universe that could have very easily not looked like this one. (Skeptics like to say that if Christianity is true, then reality should look different than it does, but that argument cuts both ways.)

Deism as a historical belief system... I agree with you that it's kind of fundamentally flawed, since I think they just took for granted that they could do away with revelation and still keep the general figure of Judeo-Christian God. I'm not convinced that this is possible, since Western intellectual history had already been too conditioned by Christianity by the time they tried that. This is probably controversial, but I actually think that reason alone (or reason + contemplation) would give us something closer to the nondualism of Vedanta Hinduism, not the deistic attempt to strip revelation away from a preexisting belief system.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

This is probably controversial, but I actually think that reason alone (or reason + contemplation) would give us something closer to the nondualism of Vedanta Hinduism, not the deistic attempt to strip revelation away from a preexisting belief system.

I think it renders something akin to Neoplatonism, which certainly has some similarity to Vedanta Hinduism.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

Deism as defined in the OP, renders a very different world. Most monotheism doesn't see the world as existing completely apart from God. Christ Pantokrator, or Christ the Sustainer, is a common motief. The world only exists through the active maintenance of it by God. Hence Revelation, efficacy of Prayer, Miracles, Providence, etc. can exist, almost seemlessly in the whole; while in this Deism, none of this really is possible as such. The fact though is that Reason has historically been seen as a semi-divine faculty; as rendering it wholely material leaves it dependant on the material composition that created it, which is not then reasoned as such. The Enlightenment deists tried to square this circle by still having the Creator endow reason in some manner, but modern deists try to ascribe it to notions like emergent properties and the like, which substantially undermines both its validity and veridicality. This type of deism sets us up to not really be able to know anything at all.

The one gives valence to events, meaning; the other essentially meaninglessness.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

I hate hypothetical questions, especially ones about Deism.

 

[BigV]

Deism as defined in the OP, renders a very different world. Most monotheism doesn't see the world as existing completely apart from God. Christ Pantokrator, or Christ the Sustainer, is a common motief. The world only exists through the active maintenance of it by God. Hence Revelation, efficacy of Prayer, Miracles, Providence, etc. can exist, almost seemlessly in the whole; while in this Deism, none of this really is possible as such.

How is the world different, judging by your experience?
Are you actively experiencing miracles? (such as God's churches being unaffected by COVID19, by believers amputated limbs regrowing, missionaries teleported to a place where they preach Jesus and then taken back to their place of residence, etc...)

 

[BigV]

I hate hypothetical questions, especially ones about Deism.

May be I can get you to repent (i.e. change your mind)?

 

[2PhiloVoid]

May be I can get you to repent (i.e. change your mind)?

No, I'm with Pascal on this one. Deism sucks!

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

How is the world different, judging by your experience?
Are you actively experiencing miracles? (such as God's churches being unaffected by COVID19, by believers amputated limbs regrowing, missionaries teleported to a place where they preach Jesus and then taken back to their place of residence, etc...)

Well, from my experience my Reason is valid. In the deism you describe, it wouldn't be and be essentially false. So I can only conclude my experience would be wholely other. I can never know truly though, but direct perception argues against it.

Similarly, I believe the world to be Good for the most part, while the modern myth of Selfishness argues against it, that most are out for themselves. Again my experience is different from what should be the case in your version of Deism, so this argues to me of a constant Good purpose within Creation, which argues for the traditional view of its continuous maintenance by said Good Power.

Finally, I am a doctor. I have seen many patients pull through which had no business surviving, especially now in this time of Covid 19. The thing about miracles is that they are rare, and can always be excused. It depends what axiom you use to judge what occurs. Personally, I believe I have witnessed miracles, things that seem medically impossible or highly unlikely, so this argues against Deism too.

 

[BigV]

Well, from my experience my Reason is valid. In the deism you describe, it wouldn't be and be essentially false. So I can only conclude my experience would be wholely other. I can never know truly though, but direct perception argues against it.

Why wouldn't reason be valid in Deism? Remember, in Deism you have a prime mover that has set things in motion and just left the world to spin on it's own.

Similarly, I believe the world to be Good for the most part, while the modern myth of Selfishness argues against it, that most are out for themselves. Again my experience is different from what should be the case in your version of Deism, so this argues to me of a constant Good purpose within Creation, which argues for the traditional view of its continuous maintenance by said Good Power.

I was born in the USSR. Believe me there is Selfishness in the US and it is what's driving the world economy. Remove selfishness, and you are toast. I still don't get what you experience that I don't experience?

Finally, I am a doctor. I have seen many patients pull through which had no business surviving, especially now in this time of Covid 19. The thing about miracles is that they are rare, and can always be excused. It depends what axiom you use to judge what occurs. Personally, I believe I have witnessed miracles, things that seem medically impossible or highly unlikely, so this argues against Deism too.

Ah... it's impressive that you are a doctor. But I think your definition of 'miracles' needs to be refined. I define a miracle as something that just doesn't happen medically. For instance, a person with rigger mortis coming back to life. Have you seen that happen? How about a person with amputated limbs one day having their limbs growing back. Have you seen that happen?

If not, your definition of miracles makes anything a miracle. In other words, I woke up today (just as I had done yesterday, and the day before and the day before that, etc...), what a miracle!

 

[Ed1wolf]

What could we expect in a world where Deism is true (i.e. a Creator God who set things in motion and then left us all to our own devices) vs a world where a Christian God is in charge?

Big difference, the world would be a world of moral chaos, because the deist god is impersonal and doesn't have any moral law to incorporate into our consciences. Also, since it is impersonal there would probably be no language because an impersonal being would not know how to create it. Also, no logic only personal beings can reason. And many other bad things.