[quote]pookie wrote:
Sloth wrote:
And some Deists will flat out agree with the idea of a Creator endowing man with inalienable rights. Why? What if the Creator was a god of war, the strong over the weak, and might alone determines what is “just?” They might say they can reason that the Creator meant for man to not steal or murder, but why? Maybe that’s exactly what he wanted men to do? Maybe the creator creates to watch it’s creatures devour each other. Maybe it’s a reality show fan. Maybe man is it’s favorite creation simply for the fact that we have the potential to one day exterminate ourselves in some spectacular and entertaining fashion.
Well that maybe, but I think most deists, in fact, most believers, would not accept the being you describe as the “supreme” God of creation. Many philosophical works about the nature of God have been written throughout history, and generally the “most reasonable” conception of such a being is one who will not show petty human traits.
Although some proposals have been made for the creator of our universe being a imperfect, evil being (the demiurge) who his himself subject to a higher power.
If I made a risk assesment, and decided I don’t fear death enough to prevent me from living and dying by the sword, why wouldn’t reasoning lead me to believe the Deity would smile upon my conquests and looting. That he perhaps he endowed me with the inalienable right to the pursuit of my neighbors’ property if I had the guts to try to make it mine. That I’m endowded with an arm to swing a sword with. Or endowed with a brain to outwit and swindle others with.
Note that all those things occur throughout history, among all religions and also unbelievers. Often, the religious reserve their “respect of the commandments” only for those of the same faith. Many faiths, in fact, elevate the killing of someone of another faith to a God-pleasing deed.
Heck, if one even believes in an intelligent creative force, capable of setting the entire shebang in motion, why believe that mere human reason could tell us anything about the motivations, the humors, or what inalienble endowments it truly desired men to have. Our capacity to understand such a mind would be, for all intents and purposes, non-existant.
Well, existent but unknowable. That last paragraph, I think, sums up well the deist viewpoint. It does not lead to depravity and complete immorality, though.
[/quote]
From your responses, maybe I’m misunderstanding what you meant by “justifiable.” Let’s take what to me is true blue Deism…the Deity winds up the clockwork of the universe and then abandons his creation. Like a child that rolls a ball under the couch, forgets about it, and goes off on some other venture. Man is left to nature. His brain dies, he is gone forever. Now that strikes me as “petty human behavior”. Attention Deficit Disorder like, human behavior.
I would’ve suspected you to believe (if we’re accepting the existence of a Deity for this specific topic) that Deism proposes the most despicable of divine creators. One that has left not even one man an escape from a return to non-existence, having been created with the ability to ponder their own death.
That’s why I’m wondering if you really meant more “tolerable” for you. They don’t have all those practices and beliefs that annoy you.
Now I know it’ll be said that some Deists believe in, or at least strongly suspect, the existence of an afterlife. However, that presents it’s own problem.
I wouldn`t get too caught up with the old fart, incidently ;)…as we have seen time and time again in this thread, name-calling and pre-pubescent-level ridicule are his forte…and sadly enough, insofar as this thread is concerned, his mainstay. Not worthy of an argument, mate. Let it be