Thread 17912773

Deism is the only tenable religious belief to hold in the modern age. All Abrahamic religions ask you to believe in absurd historical claims with little justification, and paganism is completely dead. Atheism leads to epistemic contradictions. Embrace deism like the American founding fathers did.

>>17912773 (OP)
>Atheism leads to epistemic contradictions.
like what

>>17912773 (OP)
What exactly does Deism offer you? An absent creator who doesn't care? Clearly the Founding Fathers were really atheists at a time before atheism was socially acceptable. If you are going to posit an absent God, why? What's the point?

Also
>The only religions that exist are the Abrahamic faiths, Deism, and atheism
False choice, other religions and religious positions exist. Almost 2 billion people follow Dharmic religions.

>>17912789
>Clearly the Founding Fathers were really atheists at a time before atheism was socially acceptable.
Atheism as a concept did not exist.

>>17912789
>Clearly the Founding Fathers were really atheists at a time before atheism was socially acceptable.
Not a Christard but the Founding Fathers were Deists, some as the French Revolutionaries and basically every other Enlightenment era person of note.

>>17912789
>If you are going to posit an absent God, why?
Because he can provide structure for objective morality, an afterlife, teleology, etc.

>>17912841
No, the Deist god cannot. He doesn't give a shit about you. You don't matter, so relativism reigns. It's atheism dressed up in religious garb.

>>17912773 (OP)

DEISM REFUTED:

1) God exists.

2) God does not interact with humans.

Implies: God knows of, but cannot judge humans.

1) Judgement is needed to enforce morality.

Implies: Deism has no morality.

Conclusion: Deism is equivalent to atheism, and since atheism is false, deism is false.

>>17913190
Well you're wrong Semen Sativa, because according to Deism, God is the metaphysical manifestation of inherent order and logic in the universe, which our morals are ultimately derived from, so the Deist God can still have morality as is part of the natural order without needing to "enforce" it per se

>>17912825
Nigga Epicurus was an atheist. That was 2000 years before the founding fathers

>>17912773 (OP)
Deism is atheism for people who can't into Occam's razor because their intuition tells them that minds should always be prior to rule-following systems rather than emergent from rule-following systems.

>>17913188
That's not true. You don't know what deism is.
>>17913190
The Christian God doesn't enforce morals either you retard.

>>17913438
That absolutely is true. The Deist God is a mutually exclusive with the personal God of ethical monotheism. There are no supernatural rewards for doing one thing or another, only the consequences of your actions. That's where virtue ethics steps in, to tell you what actions taken collectively are more likely to bring you peace and prosperity.

>>17913465
>ethical monotheism

>>17913438
>The Christian God doesn't enforce morals either you retard.

>Jesus Christ and the Apostles tell everyone that most people go to Hell for various sins

Deism wouldn’t exist if not for Christianity. Christianity being false would make atheism true.

“If Christ is risen, nothing else matters. And if Christ is not risen - nothing else matters.”

>>17913606
He doesn't enforce morality while on earth. Who's to say the deist God hasn't created an afterlife where we are punished or rewarded based on our actions?

>>17912773 (OP)
embrace your higher power

>>17912773 (OP)
The founding fathers were occultists.

>>17914324
God is patient and long suffering. But he eventually wipes the immoral out.

>>17912773 (OP)
I believe in astrology. I believe the accounts of alien abductees, psychics, ghosts encounters, cryptids and near-death experiencers. I believe buddha and Jesus and Allah we're all real people. But I don't believe in hell and don't believe in judgement. I know God isn't a person but I also know when I die my deceased loved ones and guides will come for me and everything will be ok. I have no fear. I know what happens to me doesn't depend on what belief system I subscribe to.

>>17914386
earth is patient and long-suffering and it's supposed to be that way or you wouldn't learn anything

>>17914386
the immoral have to keep coming back here until they learn not to be immoral

>>17914324
Is it just then for an impersonal and cold God to punish and reward people when he never laid out any rules or code of conduct for men?

In Christianity, you have:
The rigid structure of the Church. (At least if you follow Rome).
The militaristic disciplines of various orders and the priesthood.
The community which enforces moral behavior at the behest of the priests and bishops and so on.

I think this is evidence that God -does- enforce morality here on Earth. The fear of Hell and the grand reward of Heaven are themselves motivators because you're told what's at stake. Your very life.

>>17914723
>he never laid out any rules or code of conduct for men?
Well if you're a deist you believe he did through reason. Christianity itself is proof of that, it shows that people will reach towards morality and transcendence.

>>17914728
At that point, it's just a type of uncertain gnosticism.

>>17913193
>according to Deism, God is the metaphysical manifestation of inherent order and logic
Yeah that's called a mascot. It's a mascot of whatever power you think defines being. And because modernism requires everything besides humans to be beneath personhood, that power is just impersonal "logic" and "order". In this way you eat your cake (God not de facto denied) and have it too (reality is sub-personal, therefore sub-human).

There is in reality no reason to commit to the idea that God refuses to interact with humans.

>>17914736
>There is in reality no reason to commit to the idea that God refuses to interact with humans.
Maybe he believes it to be a better test of our virtue and integrity than if we follow a book or not? Let us fend for ourselves, and then the greatest will rise to the top naturally.

>>17912779
Hello, anyone?

>>17914741
Maybe. Maybe not. Like I said, I don't see the reason to believe that he set up thousands of natural laws, physical constants, social dynamics, providence etc. to have virtue rise to the top, but he draws the line at "actually talking to people".

>>17914768
"I don't see the reason" is not an argument. Why would God want to hinge literally every person's eternal redemption on some unclear historical event that happened in ancient Rome?

>>17914324
>Who's to say
Exactly, LMAO

Who the fuck can say that since this deist God has not revealed anything?

>>17914780
Well we have no evidence in the Christian afterlife either so where does that put us

>>17914772
Not seeing a reason might not be an argument, but not being able to show me one (besides a "maybe he thought...") has the same result.
>Why would God want to hinge literally every person's eternal redemption on some unclear historical event that happened in ancient Rome?
Why would God want to hinge literally every person's eternal redemption on something he never even communicated? We're essentially comparing a God who stepped down from Heaven to show us what he wants and a God who never uttered a word, and you're telling me the latter makes more sense in terms of us developing virtue. Or did I misunderstand you?

>>17914783
In pure agnosticopolis

>>17914794
>Why would God want to hinge literally every person's eternal redemption on something he never even communicated?
Considering the philosophy, science, and morality we developed I'd beg to differ. I think we have revelation through reason.

>>17914803
Three thousand years in and we aren't even sure "good" can be sufficiently grasped in propositional form at all. I think we overestimate the role of reason because it makes us feel in charge. But besides that, again - we are comparing a God who had us develop philosophy, science and ethics to a God who had us develop the same thing PLUS literally showing us what he means. I would say the latter is clearer in any sense.

>>17914826
>showing us what he means
By having people 2000 years ago write a book?

>>17914830
By living it and sending apostles who were living it and every generation since managed to have at least a few people who lived it too. There can be no better communication than the totality of human life. Words change, languages die, philological research skews whichever direction current methodological fads blow, but a human living a life is the basis of all knowledge.

>>17914841
Still no proof

>>17914855
We weren't discussing proof. We were discussing why one would draw a line between "God set up millions of things for us to foster virtue" and "God also told us directly". And I don't see why anyone would arrive at this conclusion, at least not from reason. In terms of convenience it definitely has some pull because suddenly you get the benefits of theism without the struggle of learning whatever it is a religion is teaching you, much less having to decide which religion is plausible.

>>17913514
Yeah it's the term used when you don't know how to act right without an angry Jew in the sky telling you.

>>17914743
>still crickets

>>17914862
Read Theosophy, they thought all religions lead to the same God like all jokes lead back to "you're mom". They had a prophet who was groomed (in the good way you sickos) with an extensive education befitting a prophet, this Jiddu Krishnamurti but he rejected his position.

>>17912773 (OP)
Deism is for cucks too afraid to believe in anything or make any definitive statements about our reality.

>>17912779
There being something rather than nothing.
Infinite regress of causal chains inextricably bound to one another in materialism.
Knowledge being impossible.

>>17914393
Satanism

>>17915607
>Theosophy
Satanic niggerbabble

hes right you know, because abrahamism set their god's word in stone, and deified christ, its either all or nothing. you cant believe in christ and not believe hes jewish. you cant believe in yahweh and believe the earth is not flat. if you do, youve lost sight of the jews who wrote the bible, and theres literally no reason to pretend youre still invested.

deism is the only way. its essentially just 'paganism' and the world that existed before abrahamism where everyone inherently believed in gods and didnt argue over stupid universalist beliefs. when something was universal, it was because people universally came to the same conclusion, it didnt need to be imposed on them. they arrived at those truths naturally, organically.

and cmon.. lets be real. "Siri, create the Earth"? its simply retard tier. even by the standards of its own day and age.

>>17912773 (OP)
I would agree, however:
>Proles for the most part will never follow Deism. They need to believe a god is watching over them specifically
>Deism can't be used to give legitimacy to a state
The only solution is to create a new religion with a new holy text

>>17915752
>There being something rather than nothing.
how is that an epistemic contradiction ?

>Infinite regress of causal chains inextricably bound to one another in materialism.
how is that an epistemic contradiction ?

>Knowledge being impossible.
again how is that an epistemic contradiction ?
Knowledge is just information and we already have a basic understanding on how our brains process signal from our senses and store the information in a completely materialistic set of terms

>>17912789
>Almost 2 billion """"people"""" follow Dharmic religions.
lmfao

>>17916214
>I'm racist hence crusty kang
Powerful.>>17916979

>>17917126
Never said anything about Christianity. Just that the quality of life the "peoples" of the Indian subcontinent "enjoy" is enough proof that their gods aren't worth worshipping

>>17914723
>I think this is evidence that God -does- enforce morality here on Earth. The fear of Hell and the grand reward of Heaven are themselves motivators because you're told what's at stake. Your very life.
>>17916331

>>17917360
it's superior to the quality of life of most of christian Africa and on par with the quality of life of christian Latin America

>>17917954
And? Again, I'm not defending Christianity. I just doubt the Dharmic faiths (or Islam, for that matter) have any concrete truth to them that makes them worth following

>>17917360
>Just that the quality of life the "peoples" of the Indian subcontinent "enjoy"
That's what happened after you brought your jew god and jew banks to their continent lmao

>>17918037
Imagine actually believing this lol
Also see >>17918025

>>17913190
>1) God exists.
stopped reading there

>>17914393
I like your style.

>>17915789
>>17915802
You sound like a medieval peasant with a pitchfork.
Jesus wouldn't be very proud.