As the title of this column series implies, strategy gamers love to pretend that they are gods, and not distant
Deistic gods simply setting things in motion.
Look, if you believe in
a deistic god, fine.
If one would want to indict God for doing evil, à la Job or Ivan Karamazov, then
a deistic God, for example, would have only one crime to answer for: creation itself.
While science can not disprove
a deistic god, it can disprove any god that would take any interest or effect change in our universe.
Belief in
a deistic God and one's overall belief in God were not significantly related to any psychiatric symptoms.»
(
A deistic God would be a poor, incompetent clock - maker if he had to keep intervening to get his technology straight!)
A Deistic god that has no interaction with the universe is by definition useless to believe in even if one exists, and no I am not claiming you are a deist.
Not exact matches
Most of my references are in terms of a
deistic or pantheistic
god.
So serious did matters become that the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church issued a public warning in 1798 that unless America turned from
deistic infidelity,
God would assuredly visit his wrath upon it.
If
God is acknowledged it is only in a
Deistic, radically distant sense.
It usually starts with some generic
Deistic notion of
God and then quickly narrows to one of the multitudes of theistic belief systems such as one particular strain of Christianity.
This outlook has represented a prominent strand in theology from the Hellenistic influence apparent in Hebrews 11:6 («Whoever would draw near to
God must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who seek him»), through the medieval Anselmic and Thomistic arguments for the existence of
God, reaching a climax in the 18th century
deistic arguments for a Great Designer evidenced by the intricacy and harmony of the universe.
Though the most
Deistic of the Founding Fathers, even Jefferson was not a full - fledged Deist if we accept that philosophy as having had two fundamental tenets: a rejection of biblical revelation and a conviction that
God, having created the laws of the universe, had receded from day - to - day control....
The latter statement, especially, is really based on a
deistic view of an absentee
God who must «come into» a world which on any Christian, biblical, and theistic view
God can never have left.
What emerged was a
deistic philosophy in which the ideas of sin and
God receded in favor of new social control mechanisms provided by law and legitimated by conceptions of the lawfulness of nature.
Western Christianity has become more
deistic than theistic and Scriptures that reveal a metaphysics of Divine Transcendence and a deterministic legal agenda rather than a love story of
God's relationship with the people S / He has chosen to prepare to become sacraments of Divine Love in the world.
Though many early Americans surely heard patriotic and public references to «
God» as a reference to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit of classical Christianity, it is clear that Founding Fathers such as Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin intended the word less specifically, regarding «
God» as a more removed, impersonal and
deistic entity.
Moreover
God as the
deistic «lighter of the blue touch paper»
The Newtonian synthesis and the
Deistic conception of
God.
Even though we have no evidence there could be a first cause
deistic creator
god but it can't be the biblical one due to logical inconsistancies.
do you have any idea how it feels to stand in a room during a pledged of allegiance knowing your say under the
god who want you dead, i refuse to stand every time and my heart skips a beat ever time, i feel like there going to turn to me and drag me out, the real saddest thing about the Sikhs is they are
deistic and believe they pray to your
god to,..
Davies (1982 p. 121) points out the «strong» anthropic principle is akin to the
deistic explanation of the universe — that
God designed it in all its details for humans to inhabit.
Jefferson's «self - evident» truths were
deistic ones: The pursuit of happiness is understood to be what
God intended for humans from the creation, in contrast to traditional Christianity's understanding of the pre-eminent importance of glorifying
God.
It is the same fallacy embodied in the
deistic explanation of nature that Darwin refuted — that
God designed nature in all its detail for the benefit of humans.
The only
god that could possibly exist is some sort of
deistic creator
god, and I'm quite sure such a
god doesn't listen to prayers and couldn't care less what a bunch of bugs like us are praying for.
On the other hand, if the Enlightenment is correct and we ought to adopt a
deistic view of
God, then it would be theologically inappropriate to think of supernatural intervention.
And if we affirm that Jesus was true
God and true man and believe that he rose bodily from the tomb, then logical consistency demands that we not use the Enlightenment's antisupernatural,
deistic or naturalistic arguments against traditional views on the virgin birth, the miracle stories of the Bible, the presence of the Holy Spirit, the future return of Christ, prayer and others.
The fourth model, which I wish to discuss at greater length, does allow us to speak of
God's relation to nature, yet without the coercive or mechanical implications of the monarchial and
deistic models.
It is in relating
God to nature that the
deistic and agent models purport to be most helpful.
Between them the Christian understanding of human being and society as created, fallen and redeemed by
God was made irrelevant so that these forces of modernity were left to be interpreted solely within the framework of the humanism of the Enlightenment which at best had a
Deistic faith coupled with a mechanical view of the world and a self - redemptive idea of history making for an optimistic doctrine of inevitable progress.
When atheists on here say there «is no
god» they are usually refering to the concepts of
god as proposed by men, not to a «
deistic»
god.