Having read so many posts on the religious section, one view that never bores me is the deist's point of view. There are many deists on this forum but for now am bringing the spot light on DeepSight. He is a man I dont always agree with but always respect.
I have some questions for him though, anyone is free to join the conversation.
@DeepSight, please correct me of any wrong assumptions that may come up between some of the questions.

GOD ISSUES

You believe in God but not exactly the Allah or Yahweh or Jehovah of the 3 monotheistic faiths. Tell us more about the deist's God or "World Architect".


How does the word God sound to you? The earth creator (above) or a title for universal dynamics devoid of myths and practices


Deists(not exactly you) often believe that the creator has some special intentions, such as making the universe suitable for intelligent life. The mere assertion that the cause of the universe is capable of having intentions is highly specific. Do you subscribe to this? On what evidence?


The deist god is unknown and unknowable, since it doesn’t interfere in the operation of the universe. Given that, what can you say about it, and how could you ever rely on the truth of any opinion on it? Theists, at least, claim that their deity interferes from time to time. As crazy as that may be, it is at least a logically sound argument as to how they know their ideas are right,


Can this god be observed? Is there a way to receive reliable information about its existence, purpose, or attributes? How can you define it to a useful degree.


There are so many concepts(universe, sun, humanity etc) that may or may not be termed god, how does one get a grasp of this god and what does belief in it bring you?

OTHER STUFF

What are your views about morality? How about consequentialism?


Define your views about supernatural, mind-over-matter etc.


Is there a faith article in any area of deism? Is deism a religion?
Agnostics dont "know" if god (an intelligent creator) exists. You "know/believe" one does. Is deism not using god to fill in the "ought to" gap?



So i dont muddle them together as i have a phobia for too-long posts, lets treat these above serially and other questions will come in as the thread goes on.
Over to you DS, cheers!

Nice avenue for DS, explain peculiar imagination.

Hello Ilosi - oke!

Thank you for these very pertinent questions. Rather than answer them as though I am some all-knowing monk - which is certainly not the case - I think we should walk hand in hand and discuss these questions in an open manner - a mutual journey of discovery for both of us.

I say "mutual" because there have been aspects of this that have agitated my mind of recent and I am going to be completely honest and open about such.

One such aspect is the fact that I do pray. I do not go down on my knees or set about it in any particular or consistent manner. I simply have a quiet and extremely brief inward communication with that eternal element that I understand to be GOD. Mostly my prayers consist not of intelligible words but simply of a feeling that is within my soul. I believe that such inward feelings do communicate with the spiritual more powerfully than words can. And that's all there is to it.

Of course this makes me wonder what the use of such "prayers" are in terms of the concept of a non-interfering GOD. I find this to be a riddle, but it has not stopped me from praying. My feeling is that in the first place, there are laws inherent in creation for every scenario. In this regard I often reflect that prayer surely cannot or will not change anything. The laws of GOD weave our destinies based on the inward nature and aspirations of our souls. However this has not stopped me from praying in the manner that I have said above. IT fulfills a deep spiritual thirst - a thirst for reaching out to something greater than one self. Anyhow, that is what I understand by the spiritual nature of man. If prayer will not change events, it may at least nourish and enrich the praying soul. Such an enriched soul may by that enrichment be able to change his own environment for the better.

I am rambling. This is because right now there is a more clear and present thirst in my throat. It is the thirst for a bottle of Guiness Stout after a hard day's work. I am going to get that Guiness. I will take up the discourse 2moro morning, if you don't mind.

Cheers!

Deep Sight Tribunal? I thought someone was gonna hang him liturgically by the balls. Ilosiwaju, funnily, I think you've answered half your questions within those same questions. The questions are too generalized and thus, I'll contribute when the discussions set off.

Deep Sight = Udeme

vescucci:

Deep Sight Tribunal? I thought someone was gonna hang him liturgically by the balls. Ilosiwaju, funnily, I think you've answered half your questions within those same questions. The questions are too generalized and thus, I'll contribute when the discussions set off.

Deep Sight = Udeme

Not that i answered them per se, i have been doing a little research of mine and am trying to ask relevant questions. Forgive that anyway. Very generalised? That should make it interesting because i so want to hear from folks in here.

vescucci:

Deep Sight = Udeme

My friend Udeme is a very good man. . .


@DS, i'll gladly wait for you.

Deep Sight:

. . .

One such aspect is the fact that I do pray. I do not go down on my knees or set about it in any particular or consistent manner. I simply have a quiet and extremely brief inward communication with that eternal element that I understand to be GOD. Mostly my prayers consist not of intelligible words but simply of a feeling that is within my soul. I believe that such inward feelings do communicate with the spiritual more powerfully than words can. And that's all there is to it.

. . .

I think one might as well call this meditation rather than using a loaded word like "prayer".

Deep sight my man. . . . .

Dear Ilosiwaju –

I am most sorry I did not attend to your queries earlier – it has been a little hectic. Just a little. Like I said earlier, I would like us to walk gently together – a mutual journey of discovery, and hopefully we can “edify” each other, as the Christians love to say!

ilosiwaju:

You believe in God but not exactly the Allah or Yahweh or Jehovah of the 3 monotheistic faiths. Tell us more about the deist's God or "World Architect".

Well perhaps I am splitting hairs, but I think it is important to note that there is no such thing as “the Deist’s God” any more than there is “the Christian God” or “the muslim God.” There is simply GOD. And then there are perspectives of GOD.

GOD is simply that eternal constant which is the basis of all existence.

Now as humans, we doubtless have different perspectives of GOD: we agree nonetheless, being theists, that God IS.

Recall the story about the 12 blind men touching different parts of an elephant. They all described the elephant in terms of the part that they were touching. This is a great way to view humanity’s perception of God. Our vision, being finite, is analogous to being blind in these matters. We however, being alive, have a “feel” of God, and we define our perceptions according to that feel. It needn’t be that we are wrong if we disagree: it could simply be that we are each in touch with different aspects of GOD, much like the 12 blind men around the elephant.

What is key however, is that we should actually be touching or “feeling out” the elephant before we arrive at our limited perceptions of what the elephant is like. The tragedy is that the vast majority of religious people do not even “feel” out the elephant as the 12 blind men did: they simply sit back and listen to what other people who have not felt the elephant say about the elephant – and they accept such as inviolable truth about the elephant.

That is the tragedy and irony of the acceptance of religious dogma.

How does the word God sound to you? The earth creator (above) or a title for universal dynamics devoid of myths and practices

To be honest with you, it is a frightening word – “GOD.” People just bandy about the word carelessly. If one has stopped to reflect for even an instant on what such a primordial founding element of all existence could be, one would be shattered by the sheer mystery, enormity and wonder of it all.

And in that quiet moment of reflection – we do not gain full understanding of the mystery – but we can cultivate and harbor a sense of wonder at that grand mystery which remains the eternal and constant unchangeable source of all things.

That should fill a man with a sense of wonder at all that exists, and that sense of wonder is what I understand to be true worship. Nothing else. Not shouting and singing in church. Not kneeling down to pray. Not speaking in tongues. Not paying tithes. Not reading the bible, quoran, or any other book. Nothing but just that – a sense of reverent wonder.

Many people are like children. We feel alone and scared in this vast universe. We need to hold on to the belief that someone is looking out for us. That is sometimes in psychology called the Father Syndrome, or something of the sort, I forget now. That is the reason that people have taken that eternal sacred sense of wonder and compressed it into the image of a grand old man sitting in the skies looking out for them. That image has formed the basis for the ontology of God as perceived by the religionist. No such image is necessary for the truly liberated and mature human spirit. Such a spirit recognizes that God is simply ineffable, and therein lies the beauty and the wonder – the worship – for such a spirit.

I will be back on the rest, but please do let me have your own thoughts. Cheers.

Hmmmmn, we are gradually getting there. No reservations yet on your posts so far, will be expecting you for the next phase.

Hello –

I am sorry for the extended delay in continuing, Ilosiwaju. I have been thinking how best to convey my thoughts.

ilosiwaju:


Deists(not exactly you) often believe that the creator has some special intentions, such as making the universe suitable for intelligent life. The mere assertion that the cause of the universe is capable of having intentions is highly specific. Do you subscribe to this? On what evidence?

Now this is a most delicate matter which I hope I will be able to discuss with clarity.

The root of the matter regarding God’s intentions from my particular deistic point of view is grounded in the question – “What is God?”

I have already said in very simple terms above that for me God is that eternal and unchangeable element which is responsible for all that exists.

Now to be honest with you I may simply say that my view is that the very nature of that eternal element leads it to manifest in certain ways. Those manifestations are what you will see as “intentions” – but they are not, in my view, intentions in the specific sense. They are only intentions in the sense that the nature of that element produces certain natural manifestations of the element. So we should start by having a look at what the nature of the element is.

I believe that the eternal element which I refer to as God logically is –

1. One
2. Indivisible
3. Eternal/ Timeless
4. Unchangeable/ Constant

Without going into a slew of explanations, I hope it will suffice to simply say that the nature of that element transmits an imprint into everything that exists as a consequence of that element. In this regard the fact that the element is ONE means that everything that exists as a consequence of that element bears within it the imprint of oneness – and the imprint of oneness is simply a magnetic attraction towards that ONE eternal element. That attraction finds expression in the oneness of all things, the pressure towards harmony and the grand cycles of all existence which all root back to the ONE eternal element. It would thus emerge that the nature of that element thus inherently implies an eternal drive towards oneness and this manifests as harmony.

As such it is not that I conceive of God sitting some place and saying to himself “Let there be harmony and oneness of all things” – rather it is that the inherent nature of that ONE eternal element causes a oneness of all things. I hope I am making some sense.

The deist god is unknown and unknowable, since it doesn’t interfere in the operation of the universe. Given that, what can you say about it, and how could you ever rely on the truth of any opinion on it? Theists, at least, claim that their deity interferes from time to time. As crazy as that may be, it is at least a logically sound argument as to how they know their ideas are right,

I think it is wrong to say that the Deist God is unknown or unknowable. While it is generally agreed that that eternal element that is God will always remain a mystery, I believe that the building block of Deism is the approach through reason and logic. Accordingly I believe that whilst God may eternally remain a mystery, some things about God may be reasoned and understood. Such as that God is ONE and ETERNAL for example. If one will calmly reflect on these two attributes alone, there is actually a great deal about God that may be rationally inferred from these alone.

Consequently there is no question of “relying on the truth of any opinion” about God in my view – it is rather that there is simply that which I may sit down and meditate on and with a calm sense of both reason and intuition, set within myself as my understanding of that eternal element.

Regarding the general question of interference as claimed by many theists, I cannot agree with such or share the same views. An eternal and unchangeable element such as God is said to be cannot conceivably be taking holiday trips to the Bahamas to tinker with that which it has caused to be there. The entire idea of interference is to me simply internally inconsistent. For me it simply does not square with the immutability of God. I just cannot imagine a timeless transcendental being involved in such interference.

Can this god be observed? Is there a way to receive reliable information about its existence, purpose, or attributes? How can you define it to a useful degree.

God is to be observed in everything that exists and the nature of God may be seen within the Book of Life. The Book of Life is everything around you, and everything that exists in eternity.

thehomer:

I think one might as well call this meditation rather than using a loaded word like "prayer".

You are certainly free to have your choice of words. To the extent that I view such as communication with an element that is beyond me, I see no fallacy in using the word "prayer." Meditation is more of a calm inward reflection which may or may not reach out to something beyond the individual. I think that prayer is distinct in that one reaches out to something beyond the individual.

, in one word: Mystery.

Deep Sight:

You are certainly free to have your choice of words. To the extent that I view such as communication with an element that is beyond me, I see no fallacy in using the word "prayer." Meditation is more of a calm inward reflection which may or may not reach out to something beyond the individual. I think that prayer is distinct in that one reaches out to something beyond the individual.

You are one hell of a smart man...

Deepsight you are a indeed a special deist.I find mounting evidences against Deism is usually very difficult.They are a very slippery lot!but fascinating neverthless.

1. One
2. Indivisible
3. Eternal/ Timeless
4. Unchangeable/ Constant

I guess you could derive these attributes simply from the act of creation.A being that created all material reality and time must itself be timeless and immaterial,eternal and changeless.

I am not sure, what you mean by indivible.Maybe you mean He should be simple and not made up of parts?
Noow your first attribute "one".Not clear how this can be deduced simply from the act of creation.What other evidence leads us to believe that there are not many gods such as the mythical zeus,hercules and family?

You could argue that Occams Razor would neccesitate us not to multiple explanations uneccesarily,but surely we would need a sort of arguement or evidence that the deist god is just One and not many.

Without going into a slew of explanations, I hope it will suffice to simply say that the nature of that element transmits an imprint into everything that exists as a consequence of that element. In this regard the fact that the element is ONE means that everything that exists as a consequence of that element bears within it the imprint of oneness – and the imprint of oneness is simply a magnetic attraction towards that ONE eternal element. That attraction finds expression in the oneness of all things, the pressure towards harmony and the grand cycles of all existence which all root back to the ONE eternal element. It would thus emerge that the nature of that element thus inherently implies an eternal drive towards oneness and this manifests as harmony.

Maybe you have explained this before.But, what reasons should we think all this is true?A series of clarification questions here:-

Q1.You say that the nature of that element transmits an imprint into everything that exists as a consequence of that element.
What are you refering to as the "element" and by "everything" you mean the universe or human beings?

q2.So ONENESS is the characteristic of being magnetically attracted towards the ONE eternal element.Which i assume is God.So why did the Deist god desire everything he created to be magnetically attracted to it?H

q3.What do you exactly mean by magnetically attracted to the ONE?is this a physical process, emotional process,spiritual process?what exactly goes on when a person or thing becomes magnetically attracted to the ONE?

q4.I infer that achieving harmony is the end product of this attraction to the oneness.Again, what does it actually mean to achieve harmony?Sorry for asking so many questions but as you know, in philosphy definitions are everything.