Utopia Temple
Main Forum Page Register an Account for Free! Calendar Frequently Asked Questions about this Board View New Posts Advanced Search Login
  Utopia Temple Forums > General Discussions > Respectable General Discussions > Religious Discussions

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »
Post New Thread Reply
Author Thread
Posts: 4341/4773
Donated $9.31
(21-Jan-2008 at 13:57)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by Celtic19: View Post
Who says he doesn't interact in our lives? Ever hear of miracles? Some people believe what they want to believe and THAT gives them hope.

Again I don't believe this, I'm just answering your question
You're missing the point of the thread. This is about deism, not run of the mill Christianity

My MSN is still [email protected].
My Skype is kapteindynetrekk

Last edited by Nimon, 21-Jan-2008 at 13:59.
#21  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Nimon Add Nimon to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2125/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 14:08)


Quote:
If God would be an observer, and only made nature's laws, then we humans are merely a product of that.. like anything else in this universe. Would every single living thing that dies have an afterlife?
Why not? That would be the most efficent way to use all your subjects. In fact i always suspected that cockroaches are far more intersting then humans to an outside observer

Quote:
In that retrospect, if you're assuming there's an afterlife.. you might just as well assume there's several 'afterlifes'.
Why not? In fact there could an infinite number of afterlifes. Or maybe reincarnation. That would also be quite efficent. And spare the effort of creating additional dimensions

Quote:
Actually, if god in the first place only created the laws of nature from which we sprung, then why if he'd create an alternative universe or dimension.. or 'afterlife' as you say, wouldn't he do the same?
Sorry can you elaborate? The same what?

Quote:
Why make the assumption he'd move deceased 'test subjects' from one to the other?
Why not? To me at least it makes far more sense then just to waste your subjects with termianting their existance completly

Hey i made three why not just in this post alone

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 14:08.
#22  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4342/4773
Donated $9.31
(21-Jan-2008 at 14:14)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why not? In fact there could an infinite number of afterlifes. Or maybe reincarnation. That would also be quite efficent. And spare the effort of creating additional dimensions
The concept of an almighty god having to "spare the effort" of doing something is a bit absurd in itself.

My MSN is still [email protected].
My Skype is kapteindynetrekk
#23  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Nimon Add Nimon to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2126/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 14:19)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by Nimon: View Post
The concept of an almighty god having to "spare the effort" of doing something is a bit absurd in itself.
The thought of an all mighty god chosing the most efficient way seem quite logical to me. Sparing the effort is just a bonus
Besides wasn't there something in the Bible about resting on the seventh day? So if we want to connect this to christianity and not just the general conecpt of God it makes even more sense

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 14:21.
#24  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as active 8)
Posts: 260/389
(21-Jan-2008 at 14:49)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why not? That would be the most efficent way to use all your subjects. In fact i always suspected that cockroaches are far more intersting then humans to an outside observer
Well, for one thing, everything alive right now is what it is because of our nature's laws. With different nature laws we wouldn't be who we are, we'd likely not even survive. And an 'afterlife' with the same laws would be like doing the exact same experiment over again, which is obviously useless. Then ofcourse you could argue we'd take on a different form after death, remain a 'soul' as some might say. But that's quite silly to assume if god only created nature's laws in the first place, and not life itself as we know it. Deceased taking on another form would simply be part of the experiment, a result even of his created laws. From a deist point of view he wouldn't interfere with even that and so would have no say in how life after death would look or evolve. So, I think it's a bit silly to assume that an afterlife has evolved from his initial nature's laws.
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why not? In fact there could an infinite number of afterlifes. Or maybe reincarnation. That would also be quite efficent. And spare the effort of creating additional dimensions
Reincarnation in deism can only exist if reincarnation is part of the natural proces, since otherwise it would be interfering with the actual experiment. Furthermore I don't see how it could be more efficient, since he only created the starting point and it's laws and let that evolve.. which would be much simpler than reincarnated billions of lifes over and over again.
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Sorry can you elaborate? The same what?
I'll elaborate. If god created nature and it's laws in our universe and not interfere with it's evolution, why wouldn't he do the same with another dimension/universe/something? Why would you assume he'd interfere with another dimension, with it's own laws etc. by throwing our deceased life in there?
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why not? To me at least it makes far more sense then just to waste your subjects with termianting their existance completly
To me it doesn't. Because you're assuming that we're either still alive in some form after we're death and still part of the initial experiment, or god would revive us in some form and place us in some other experiment, and thus interfere with that experiment.

Last edited by active 8, 21-Jan-2008 at 14:52.
#25  
View Public Profile Find more posts by activ8 Add activ8 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2127/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 15:14)


Quote:
But that's quite silly to assume if god only created nature's laws in the first place, and not life itself as we know it.
What are you talking about exactly. If we are talking for the judeo chrisitan version of the god he is supouse to be all mighty and thus created everything from laws,to life and to a possible after life


Quote:
Deceased taking on another form would simply be part of the experiment, a result even of his created laws. From a deist point of view he wouldn't interfere with even that and so would have no say in how life after death would look or evolve. So, I think it's a bit silly to assume that an afterlife has evolved from his initial nature's laws.
Why would the afterlife evovle? If he is the creator of everything logicly the afterlife would have been created along with everything else and wouldn't need to evolve

Quote:
Reincarnation in deism can only exist if reincarnation is part of the natural proces, since otherwise it would be interfering with the actual experiment.
And why wouldn't it be part of the natural process?

Quote:
Furthermore I don't see how it could be more efficient, since he only created the starting point and it's laws and let that evolve.. which would be much simpler than reincarnated billions of lifes over and over again.
Well it's more efficient since you have more subjects. You gain new ones but don't lose the old ones. You just change their envrioemnt and form

Quote:
If god created nature and it's laws in our universe and not interfere with it's evolution, why wouldn't he do the same with another dimension/universe/something? Why would you assume he'd interfere with another dimension, with it's own laws etc. by throwing our deceased life in there?
What makes you think that going to this other dimension/afterlife under another form let's call it a soul is not part of the natural process but requires the direct intervention of god?

Quote:
To me it doesn't. Because you're assuming that we're either still alive in some form after we're death and still part of the initial experiment, or god would revive us in some form and place us in some other experiment, and thus interfere with that experiment.
Why would that interefere with the experiment? How do you know that is not a natural part of the experiment? Recyling the subjects seems like a good idea. Hell we do it with resources all the time

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 15:17.
#26  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as active 8)
Posts: 261/389
(21-Jan-2008 at 15:51)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
What are you talking about exactly. If we are talking for the judeo chrisitan version of the god he is supouse to be all mighty and thus created everything from laws,to life and to a possible after life
From a deist point of view we and life as we know it was only indirectly created by god. We're merely the result of the evolution of his creation and it's laws. Deism believes that reason, not faith, brings us religious truth. We as humans find logic in nature's laws and life's evolution. So again, how is it logical for you to assume that life after death exists when our current knowledge on nature and it's laws do not support that in any way? How is that reasonable?
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why would the afterlife evovle? If he is the creator of everything logicly the afterlife would have been created along with everything else and wouldn't need to evolve
Why would we not evolve after death? In this context we wouldn't even die, we'd merely take on another form. But, we'd still be living in the same universe under the same laws because otherwise he interfered, so what reason is there to believe we'd stop evolving? If we would, what use would it have for him in the first place? If he would create the afterlife then he's interfering.
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
And why wouldn't it be part of the natural process?
How is it logical to assume with our knowledge on nature laws and life that reincarnation is part of the natural proces?
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
What makes you think that going to this other dimension/afterlife under another form let's call it a soul is not part of the natural process but requires the direct intervention of god?
Again, how is that in anyway more reasonable than that not happening?
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Why would that interefere with the experiment? How do you know that is not a natural part of the experiment? Recyling the subjects seems like a good idea. Hell we do it with resources all the time
Again, how is that logic? Knowing nature's current laws, how is it logical to assume there's a law in nature for once something dies it's automatically moved to some other dimension in some form? And recycling subjects is never a good idea. It's like a scientist using the same subjects for his cancer research AND his aids research.
#27  
View Public Profile Find more posts by activ8 Add activ8 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2128/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 16:10)


Quote:
From a deist point of view we and life as we know it was only indirectly created by god. We're merely the result of the evolution of his creation and it's laws. Deism believes that reason, not faith, brings us religious truth. We as humans find logic in nature's laws and life's evolution. So again, how is it logical for you to assume that life after death exists when our current knowledge on nature and it's laws do not support that in any way? How is that reasonable?
It's no more reaosonable then to assume that it doesn't exist. If we go by the assumption that god does exist i see it as more likely that this is a never ending experiment and that death is just one phase of it. Naturally from an objective point of view the chances of an after life is only 50/50 but i am a optimistic person

Quote:
Why would we not evolve after death? In this context we wouldn't even die, we'd merely take on another form. But, we'd still be living in the same universe under the same laws because otherwise he interfered, so what reason is there to believe we'd stop evolving?
Wait i thougth we were talkign about the afterlife itself evolving. At least that's what i got from your post
Quote:
So, I think it's a bit silly to assume that an afterlife has evolved from his initial nature's laws.
I don't see anythign wrong with us evolving well changing after death.
Also what makes you think that the afterlife is in the same universe and with the same laws?

Quote:
If we would, what use would it have for him in the first place? If he would create the afterlife then he's interfering.
Why would he be interefring by creating a recylcing universe where no subject is lost?

Quote:
How is it logical to assume with our knowledge on nature laws and life that reincarnation is part of the natural proces?
Very. Now i took physics a logn time ago but i do believe that nothing can actually be destroyed really . It only changes form

Quote:
Again, how is that in anyway more reasonable than that not happening?
It isn't. As i said the chances is 50/50. And considering we can't possibly imagine how the mind of an all mighty god works we can only go by our own ideas. And since i am optimistic i am rooting for the afterlife

Quote:
Again, how is that logic? Knowing nature's current laws, how is it logical to assume there's a law in nature for once something dies it's automatically moved to some other dimension in some form?
It's no less logical then to assume there is an all mighty god in the first place. I personally believe that if there is an all mighty god and he is an observer it would be logical of him to create a system where nothing is lost but merely changes so he can get the most possible data. Of course as i said this is pure assumption since we can never know the mind of a god but when it comes to the supernatural all we can do is assume. if we could test it it would be science not the supernatural

Quote:
And recycling subjects is never a good idea. It's like a scientist using the same subjects for his cancer research AND his aids research.
I think it's more like a shrink who first monitors his subject during his normal life and then in a completly different enviorment and situation.


Of course natually if we assume that the god is omnipotent there woudln't be much sense in making an experiment in the first place since he would know all possible outcomes and he would be just going through the motions but for the sake of the discusion let's ignore this.

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 16:14.
#28  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as active 8)
Posts: 262/389
(21-Jan-2008 at 17:50)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
It's no more reaosonable then to assume that it doesn't exist. If we go by the assumption that god does exist i see it as more likely that this is a never ending experiment and that death is just one phase of it. Naturally from an objective point of view the chances of an after life is only 50/50 but i am a optimistic person
That's like saying the chance the tooth fairy exists is 50/50. Afterlife is only supported by speculation, there's no proof whatsoever that even remotely indicates the possibility of an afterlife. I'm not argueing against how you feel about the afterlife. I'm argueing against the believe of an afterlife in deism. In deism, faith holds no ground, reason does. When a god creates a universe with physic laws that so far we humans seem to find logical and understandable, it's silly to assume he also made laws involving an afterlife as there's no proof of it whatsoever. And faith constitutes belief that is not based on proof.

Besides that, I don't see why there needs to be an afterlife for this to be a neverending experiment. The universe and life as a whole doesn't end because of an individual's death. Quite frankly it's quite easy to imagine a god would be more interested in the progress and evolution of life as whole than the life of an individual.
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
It's no less logical then to assume there is an all mighty god in the first place. I personally believe that if there is an all mighty god and he is an observer it would be logical of him to create a system where nothing is lost but merely changes so he can get the most possible data. Of course as i said this is pure assumption since we can never know the mind of a god but when it comes to the supernatural all we can do is assume. if we could test it it would be science not the supernatural
But we're not debating whether or not a deist god exists. We're debating whether the afterlife holds ground in deism. And what you personally believe holds no ground in deism, deism finds religous truth in reason.. not faith.
#29  
View Public Profile Find more posts by activ8 Add activ8 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2130/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 18:18)


Quote:
That's like saying the chance the tooth fairy exists is 50/50.
Well when you get right down to it with the lack of any physical evidence the chance is 50/50. Either it does exist or it doesn't (that's provided that the existance of a superantural being such as god is arleady established. After all if he can exist why not the tooth fairy? )

Quote:
Afterlife is only supported by speculation, there's no proof whatsoever that even remotely indicates the possibility of an afterlife.
Of course. But then again there is no proof for God either. However if we assume that God exists and is an observer i think that there is a big chance of an afterlife

Quote:
argueing against the believe of an afterlife in deism. In deism, faith holds no ground, reason does.
Oh i am not trying to argue the details of the deism. I am merely specualting based on the figure of god as an observer. I by no means speak of the deistic school of thought. Just specualting on their idea of god

Quote:
When a god creates a universe with physic laws that so far we humans seem to find logical and understandable, it's silly to assume he also made laws involving an afterlife as there's no proof of it whatsoever.
And faith constitutes belief that is not based on proof.
But if we base our logic on the proofs alone then it's silly to assume that god created us in the first place since there is no proof for god. What i am trying to say that if we can accept god as real figure then afterlfie is really not as absurd but a rather realistic oportunity even though it lacks evidence

Quote:
Besides that, I don't see why there needs to be an afterlife for this to be a neverending experiment.
Well there is no actual need but it seems like a great idea to me that would only enrich the experiment

Quote:
Quite frankly it's quite easy to imagine a god would be more interested in the progress and evolution of life as whole than the life of an individual.
Not really. It's easy to imagine a human would be more interested in thsi because of his limited abilities but if you could follow each individual life then i would e quite interested

Quote:
But we're not debating whether or not a deist god exists. We're debating whether the afterlife holds ground in deism
As i said i won't bother to argue details about the philopshy of deism just their concept of god. I am arguing that if god exists and he is seen as an observer or a scientists an afterlife makes perfect sense to me.

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 18:21.
#30  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4297/4829
(21-Jan-2008 at 18:21)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by advocatus: View Post
Last year in my history class we briefly talked about the religious concept of Deism; the thought of God creating all the laws of physics, all the mathematical concepts, etc. then just sitting back and watching what happens. When something terrible happens and a person questioning their religious beliefs, wondering where God is and why "He" didn't help... that scenario fits very well with Deism.

I don't think I'd go as far as to say that's what I really believe, but I'm intreged. What are your thoughts on it?
Well, I think God generally acts like this Deist God since the Resurrection of Christ. Of course, there are exceptions, for instance he helps in the purging of demons from the possessed, and he does answer prayers from time to time.

A while ago I was pondering why God chose a more hands off approach since then, but when you think about it, it does make sense. Jesus provides an easy route to heaven for even the most vile sinner. If God continued going about smiting evil doers with fireballs from heaven it would be so obvious that only stupid people would refuse to confess their guilt and accept God's grace through Christ. I think God wants to reward virtuous people, not evil ones who "game the system". True virtue is doing good or renouncing evil without certainty of reward or punishment.
#31  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Royal Assassin3 Add Royal Assassin3 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as active 8)
Posts: 264/389
(21-Jan-2008 at 18:35)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Of course. But then again there is no proof for God either. However if we assume that God exists and is an observer i think that there is a big chance of an afterlife
Myes, but ofcourse a real deist would have at least some reason to believe his god exists
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
Oh i am not trying to argue the details of the deism. I am merely specualting based on the figure of god as an observer. I by no means speak of the deistic school of thought. Just specualting on their idea of god
Myeah, but this discussion on afterlife started in the first place because of the concept that there's no hope in deism, which you disagreed with The whole rejecting faith, miracles and mysteries part is an important part of deism and can't be ignored there.
Originally Posted by DHoffryn: View Post
But if we base our logic on the proofs alone then it's silly to assume that god created us in the first place since there is no proof for god.
I know, otherwise we'd be deists

Last edited by active 8, 21-Jan-2008 at 18:37.
#32  
View Public Profile Find more posts by activ8 Add activ8 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 2131/2825
(21-Jan-2008 at 18:40)


Quote:
Myes, but ofcourse a real deist would have at least some reason to believe his god exists
Lol yeah but still he wouldn't have any real proof. It's no wonder some deists turned to atheism later on (that's if i remember right. The French revolution has done some work on my memory lately)

Quote:
Myeah, but this discussion on afterlife started in the first place because of the concept that there's no hope in deism, which you disagreed with The whole rejecting faith, miracles and mysteries part is an important part of deism and can't be ignored there
Nah i disagreed i believe with Caelis that such a god would provide an afterlife. I am solely arguing about the concept of god. Deism itself. Well that's a whole other mess

The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common; they don't alter their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit the views

Last edited by DHoffryn, 21-Jan-2008 at 18:42.
#33  
View Public Profile Find more posts by DHoffryn Add DHoffryn to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
(Posted as Celtic19)
Posts: 240/410
(21-Jan-2008 at 20:33)


Originally Posted by Nimon: View Post
You're missing the point of the thread. This is about deism, not run of the mill Christianity
Dang it. You see this is another reason everyone should make sure the brain is engaged before the mouth
Fair enough I am mistaken

Last edited by Celtic19, 21-Jan-2008 at 20:34.
#34  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Celtic22 Add Celtic22 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 349/464
(22-Jan-2008 at 04:30)


I have to post this, it's too good to miss.
Originally Posted by RA3:
True virtue is doing good or renouncing evil without certainty of reward or punishment.
So you're saying that an Atheist that does good deserves to go to heaven more than a 100% convinced "God is real" Christian who does good. I just, from my viewpoint, disproved your entire religion.

And whichever one of you is BSing your way into the 'I am right' with all the what if statements needs to get a grip on themselves. You can what if your way to a winning argument, but you have really accomplished nothing other than being more creative than the other person.

I am the darkness in your life, I am the light
I am the end of your tunnel, I am the beginning of your future
I am the end, your end. I am the path to your salvation.

Your bane, or your hope. You decide.

Last edited by Brightbane, 22-Jan-2008 at 04:34.
Edit reason: damn quotes
#35  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Brightbane Add Brightbane to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 4301/4829
(22-Jan-2008 at 17:48)


Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by Brightbane: View Post
So you're saying that an Atheist that does good deserves to go to heaven more than a 100% convinced "God is real" Christian who does good. I just, from my viewpoint, disproved your entire religion.
Not really.

The atheist that does good without expectation of reward or punishment has indeed done a virtuous act. However, getting into heaven is not about an account balance between good and bad deeds. It also requires lack of sin, and that can only come through the grace of Jesus Christ. Hence the "good" atheist would not get into heaven.

As to the Christian in your example, they have the same information as you atheists, so usually when they say they are 100% certain they are really saying that their faith overcomes any doubts they may have.

The alternative is that they directly experienced divine phenomena that provided 100% proof. In which case, nothing stops them from "gaming the system" by confessing their sins and accepting the grace of God through Jesus. That in itself does get you into heaven. Heck that's how one of the early leaders of the Christian church was converted. Still, if God intended to allow everyone that opportunity, he would just come down and shoot off a few fireballs on national television.

Last edited by Royal Assassin3, 22-Jan-2008 at 17:52.
#36  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Royal Assassin3 Add Royal Assassin3 to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Posts: 7242/8194
(22-Jan-2008 at 20:46)
Re: Deism is very intreging

Originally Posted by Royal Assassin3: View Post
The atheist that does good without expectation of reward or punishment has indeed done a virtuous act. However, getting into heaven is not about an account balance between good and bad deeds. It also requires lack of sin, and that can only come through the grace of Jesus Christ. Hence the "good" atheist would not get into heaven.
But previously you wrote "I think God wants to reward virtuous people, not evil ones who "game the system". So you mean God wants to reward a virtous atheist, but can't? Then your God isn't omipotent. Or did you have some other reward in mind?
Quote:
The alternative is that they directly experienced divine phenomena that provided 100% proof. In which case, nothing stops them from "gaming the system" by confessing their sins and accepting the grace of God through Jesus.
Only if your God is a fool who falls for such a simple trick. I thought God was supposed to be able to read your mind and sense what you really feel.

Deism is sterile, i.e. it impossible to verify and has no implications for how you should live, but at least it isn't contradictory as ordinary religions.
#37  
View Public Profile Find more posts by Bernel Add Bernel to your Buddy List Reply with Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump:

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Not Deism. Deism (sp?) beleives in God but fully rejects the Bible. thamkeng Religious Discussions 8 01-Oct-2004 20:36


All times are GMT+1. The time now is 04:07.

Powered by vBulletin (modified)
Copyright ©2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.