On Deism, or the lack thereof

J

jmpet

Valued Senior Member
In the modern day we look back theocratically at all the mysteries and miracles that occured up to our time which tend to peter out around 1875-1925, when (modern) science took over to define things and events.

And mostly we are disappointed. Padre Pio was one of the last of the old order saints- who had stigmata and countless miracles attributed to him.

And personally, Pope John Paul II was our last great saint/pope- the job he did as pope is something not seen at the Vatican for hundreds of years. Yeah, a lot of it was time and place but he was the right guy at the right time and place to change the world, which he did in his lifetime. And he did it.

(And for the record, the Third Prophecy at Fatima was about our current Pope, not JP II.)

Apart from these examples, I have yet to see ANY SORT OF SUPERNATURAL EVENT AT ALL from ANY PRIEST, NUN, OR DEVOTED TO THE FAITH since science took over and that bears heavily.

This, combined with the Internet, has produced a new mindthought: absorbing all the information at our fingertips to get to the heart of the religous matter. And truthfully, it's lacking.

I don't (I actually kinda) blame athiests for abandoning God from lack of information. How many previews can you sit through at a theater until you demand a refund?!!

But God is not going to appear anytime soon- sorry. You are no more special than people born 1,000 or one million years ago... God owes you nothing.

But He gave you everything. You exist because of God. And God forgives you for denying him- Thomas doubted too until he put his fingers into the wounds of Jesus.

Happy Palm Sunday everyone!
 
But before science took over there were many that swore that they talked to god and even wrote what it said to them in a book. Why is it that when we have the modern ways of communicating that god doesn't say anything to anyone? It seems strange that when things couldn't be investigated and only the words of those "chosen" to hear god were the chosen people being talked to. Why isn't the same thing happening today? There's been no one that could be proven today that they performed a "miracle" made by their god.
 
jmpet said:
In the modern day we look back theocratically at all the mysteries and miracles that occured up to our time which tend to peter out around 1875-1925, when (modern) science took over to define things and events.
Click to expand...

Science's cultural prestige predates the beginning of the 20'th century. Science was probably just as influential in the second half of the 1800's. I think that many European intellectuals were persuaded way back in the 1600's, and it started trickling down into the general population and becoming a broader cultural movement in the 1700s.

But in those days it generally took the form of deism and not atheism. People weren't rejecting the idea of a creator-god, since the design argument seemed unassailable. What people started questioning was the idea of special religious revelations, whether in the tradition of the Catholic church or in the Protestants' beloved Bible. In Europe at the time, that was accompanied by a strong wave of anti-clericalism and rejection of established churches, all associated with a broader popular hostility to old-regimes and aristocratic classes. The French revolution was the poster-child for those tendencies.

I guess that it was probably the cultural reverberations of Darwin's theory of natural selection that finally put a mid-1800's stake in the heart of European deism. The design argument suddenly lost most of its hitherto unanswerable force. (And the fundies have never forgiven Darwin for that sin. He's become their Satan.) Henceforth, the alternative to conventional church religiosity wasn't deism, but flat-out atheism.

And mostly we are disappointed. Padre Pio was one of the last of the old order saints- who had stigmata and countless miracles attributed to him.
Click to expand...

I agree with you that the old medieval-style miracles have become an endangered species in the modern West. The Protestants had been skeptical of them since the reformation. For the Protestants, God didn't communicate through signs and wonders, and certainly not through Catholic saints. For them it was sola-scriptura, scripture alone. Which had the totally unintended result of draining all the magic out of the physical world. That's one of the historical reasons for the rise of deism, which came to see the physical world as kind of a clock-work originally created by God and operating ever since by natural law alone.

But the thing is, that's Europe. Australia, New Zealand and (perhaps to a lesser extent) Canada followed the European lead while the United States has followed a very similar but subtly different historical path. (In the US, the Constitutional separation of church and state, along with immigrants' use of religious identification to symbolize their ethnic identities, meant that European-style anti-clericalism was less visible here.)

But while traditional Christianity gradually withered in the West, it's been growing in other places. In parts of Latin America, Central America in particular, pentecostal Protestantism has been cutting into established Catholicism. This form of Protestantism strongly embraces 'gifts of the spirit' and hasn't turned its back on the miraculous. In the Philippines, the old-style Catholicism flourishes and many stigmatics and similar types are visible there. And there's Africa, where the growth of Christianity (and of Islam) is most pronounced. In Africa, Christianity is often syncretized, blended with traditional religious ideas such as ancestor-worship and the extremely widespread African belief in witchcraft and sorcery. Belief in miracles, signs, saints and malefic demonic influences fits right in. That style of Christian religiosity has probably never been healthier than it is today in central and southern Africa.
 
Last edited:
jmpet said:
In the modern day we look back theocratically at all the mysteries and miracles that occured up to our time which tend to peter out around 1875-1925, when (modern) science took over to define things and events.

And mostly we are disappointed. Padre Pio was one of the last of the old order saints- who had stigmata and countless miracles attributed to him.

And personally, Pope John Paul II was our last great saint/pope- the job he did as pope is something not seen at the Vatican for hundreds of years. Yeah, a lot of it was time and place but he was the right guy at the right time and place to change the world, which he did in his lifetime. And he did it.

(And for the record, the Third Prophecy at Fatima was about our current Pope, not JP II.)
How bout that priest in Hawaii that cured the lepers . Damian was his name . He gained sainthood last year ?
Apart from these examples, I have yet to see ANY SORT OF SUPERNATURAL EVENT AT ALL from ANY PRIEST, NUN, OR DEVOTED TO THE FAITH since science took over and that bears heavily.

This, combined with the Internet, has produced a new mindthought: absorbing all the information at our fingertips to get to the heart of the religous matter. And truthfully, it's lacking.

I don't (I actually kinda) blame athiests for abandoning God from lack of information. How many previews can you sit through at a theater until you demand a refund?!!

But God is not going to appear anytime soon- sorry. You are no more special than people born 1,000 or one million years ago... God owes you nothing.

But He gave you everything. You exist because of God. And God forgives you for denying him- Thomas doubted too until he put his fingers into the wounds of Jesus.

Happy Palm Sunday everyone!
Click to expand...

Father Damian who lived in Hawaii. Cured Lepers
 
Aw man... I thought we finally had a miracle on our hands to prove the existance of God :/
 
jmpet said:
In the modern day...
...
other stuff
...
But He gave you everything. You exist because of God. And God forgives you for denying him- Thomas doubted too until he put his fingers into the wounds of Jesus.
Click to expand...
Just out of curiosity - but what does this have to do with Deism - or the lack thereof?

Your closing paragraph is a theistic position - as Deism is with regard a Universe devoid of God's interference from inception, let alone putting his "son" on Earth.

So is there a point with regard Deism?
Maybe I missed it in your OP?
 
Too many people today blindly reject faith from simple lack of evidence. I am saying there never was such evidence- or not at least for 2500 years. The Arc I consider evidence of God as it is His physical manifestation. But then again we have no proof the Arc ever existed today.

I guess my point is that in light of the lack of evidence, people should show a little faith towards theology and not blindly reject it.

Thanks for your comment BTW-
 
jmpet said:
Too many people today blindly reject faith from simple lack of evidence. I am saying there never was such evidence- or not at least for 2500 years. The Arc I consider evidence of God as it is His physical manifestation. But then again we have no proof the Arc ever existed today.

I guess my point is that in light of the lack of evidence, people should show a little faith towards theology and not blindly reject it.

Thanks for your comment BTW-
Click to expand...

Better to reject faith and do no harm than to accept it like these fools and do harm.

And this is what you are pushing?
Shame on you.

It is my view that all literalists and fundamentals hurt all of us who are Religionists.
They all hurt their parent religions and everyone else who has a belief. They make us all into laughing stocks and should rethink their position. There is a Godhead but not the God of talking animals, genocidal floods and retribution. Belief in fantasy is evil.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HKHaClUCw4&feature=PlayList&p=5123864A5243470E&index=0&playnext=1

They also do much harm to their own.

African witches and Jesus
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MlRG9gXriVI&feature=related

Jesus Camp 1of 9
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOqGhcwwE1s

Promoting death to Gays.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMw2Zg_BVzw&feature=related


For evil to grow my friends, all good people need do is nothing.
Fight them and blind faith when you can.

Regards
DL
 
jmpet said:
I guess my point is that in light of the lack of evidence, people should show a little faith towards theology and not blindly reject it.
Click to expand...

What ought to be or should be shows no ontology and yet the blind leading the blind by blind faith state it as truth and fact and so we can blindly reject this unethical stance, plus we have many disproofs based on self-contradiction of the desired notion, and even know why such belief can take hold of some.
 
jmpet said:
Too many people today blindly reject faith from simple lack of evidence. I am saying there never was such evidence- or not at least for 2500 years. The Arc I consider evidence of God as it is His physical manifestation. But then again we have no proof the Arc ever existed today.

I guess my point is that in light of the lack of evidence, people should show a little faith towards theology and not blindly reject it.

Thanks for your comment BTW-
Click to expand...

rejecting a claim based on absence of evidence and the presence of contradictory evidence is the opposite of blind rejection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top