On Good and Evil by Albert Einstein

This short essay taken from Albert Einstein's book The World as I See It p. 7.

---

It is right in principle that those should be the best loved who have contributed most to the elevation of the human race and human life. But, if one goes on to ask who they are, one finds oneself in no inconsiderable difficulties.

In the case of political, and even of religious, leaders, it is often very doubtful whether they have done more good or harm. Hence I most seriously believe that one does people the best service by giving them some elevating work to do and thus indirectly elevating them. This applies most of all to the great artist, but also in a lesser degree, to the scientist.

To be sure, it is not the fruits of scientific research that elevate a man and enrich his nature, but the urge to understand, the intellectual work, creative or receptive. It would surely be absurd to judge the value of the Talmud, for instance, by its intellectual fruits.

The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained to liberation from the self.

 

Read More

Epicurus – Jefferson's Favorite

Another philosophy that focused on how one should live was Epicureanism. Its founder was Epicurus, who was younger than Pyrrho the Skeptic by 19 years, and older than Zeno, the founder of Stoicism, by 8 years. Epicurus was from the island of Samos. He went to Athens at the age of eighteen to confirm his Athenian citizenship – the year before Alexander died. Later he took up residence in the city of Mytilene, and there, at the age of thirty, he acquired recognition as a philosopher.

Like the Cynics and Stoics, Epicureans believed it best to purge oneself of the appetite for power or fortune, and they too favored withdrawal from the corruptions of society. Nevertheless, they wished to keep the wealth and possessions that helped make life pleasant, and Epicureans, it seems, were people who had accumulated some wealth.

Epicureans believed in community. They were political insofar as they saw that it was in the best interest of society for people to carry out agreements that promote fellowship. This implied a contractual form of government. But Epicureans and his followers did not advocate group action for social change. Their approach to politics suited those who wished to continue living comfortably under authoritarian rulers. They advocated civic tranquility and a search for peace of mind. They advocated living unnoticed, abstaining from public life and from making enemies.

Epicurus addressed the ultimate question about life by claiming that life was worth living. He saw life as possibly joyous – if one had an adequate sensitivity to the world of beauty and good friendships, good health and freedom from drudgery. He believed in the pleasures of contemplation, physical beauty and attachments to others.

Epicurus believed that the driving force of life is the avoidance of pain. He believed that the essence of virtue is avoiding inflicting pain upon others. He believed that the avoidance of pain for oneself and others should take precedence over the pursuit of pleasure. He advocated self-control to avoid painful consequences. Pleasure, he said, should be adjusted to the equilibrium in one's body and mind. Excessive devotion to the gratification of appetites, he said, produces misery rather than happiness and therefore should be avoided.

On the issue of happiness, he differed from Plato in that he accepted pleasure as a meaningful part of life. Plato believed that virtue is incompatible with pleasure, that virtue is sufficient for happiness. Epicurus was compatible with modern psychology in his view that seeking pleasure is rational. He believed that seeking pleasure can be accompanied by virtue if one learns to make choices that fit with well-being.

Stoics, as men of God, distorted Epicureanism by associating it with lust and hedonism. And they denounced Epicureans as atheists.

Epicurus was influenced by the materialism of Democritus. He believed that humanity created its destiny without interference from capricious gods. Religion, he complained, unnecessarily frightened people by describing them at the mercy of gods and demons. He escaped from the unpopularity of atheism by speaking of gods as if they were nature rather than nature's creators. The gods, claimed Epicurus, should be worshiped with neither fear nor hope. And do not fear death, he said, for death is but eternal sleep and the dead feel no pain or torment.

Epicureans questioned various methods of arriving at truth. They championed an empirical approach, a process of confirmation and disconfirmation. For example, when a person from afar comes closer and closer, you confirm or reject that it is the person you expected it to be. It was an idea compatible with humanity getting closer to reality with the microscope and telescope.

Epicureanism was to be the avowed philosophy of Thomas Jefferson, who must have found Epicureanism compatible with the Deism popular in his day, which also placed God outside of human affairs. Jefferson was to describe Epicureanism as the most rational philosophical system of the ancients. And his Epicureanism was to find expression in his contribution to the American Declaration of Independence, in its phrase "pursuit of happiness."

Read More

Basic Religion Test Stumps Many Americans

Americans are by all measures a deeply religious people, but they are also deeply ignorant about religion.

How much do you know about religion? Try answering a sampling of questions asked in a phone survey by the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life. Researchers from the independent Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life phoned more than 3,400 Americans and asked them 32 questions about the Bible,

Christianity and other world religions, famous religious figures and the constitutional principles governing religion in public life. On average, people who took the survey answered half the questions incorrectly, and many flubbed even questions about their own faith. Those who scored the highest were atheists and agnostics, as well as two religious minorities: Jews and Mormons. The results were the same even after the researchers controlled for factors like age and racial differences. “Even after all these other factors, including education, are taken into account, atheists and agnostics, Jews and Mormons still outperform all the other religious groups in our survey,” said Greg Smith, a senior researcher at Pew. That finding might surprise some, but not Dave Silverman, president of American Atheists, an advocacy group for nonbelievers that was founded by Madalyn Murray O’Hair. “I have heard many times that atheists know more about religion than religious people,” Mr. Silverman said. “Atheism is an effect of that knowledge, not a lack of knowledge.

I gave a Bible to my daughter. That’s how you make atheists.” Among the topics covered in the survey were: Where was Jesus born? What is Ramadan? Whose writings inspired the Protestant Reformation? Which Biblical figure led the exodus from Egypt? What religion is the Dalai Lama?

Joseph Smith? Mother Teresa? In most cases, the format was multiple choice. The researchers said that the questionnaire was designed to represent a breadth of knowledge about religion, but was not intended to be regarded as a list of the most essential facts about the subject. Most of the questions were easy, but a few were difficult enough to discern which respondents were highly knowledgeable.

 On questions about the Bible and Christianity, the groups that answered the most right were Mormons and white evangelical Protestants. On questions about world religions, like Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism and Judaism, the groups that did the best were atheists, agnostics and Jews. One finding that may grab the attention of policy makers is that most Americans wrongly believe that anything having to do with religion is prohibited in public schools. An overwhelming 89 percent of respondents, asked whether public school teachers are permitted to lead a class in prayer, correctly answered no. But fewer than one of four knew that a public school teacher is permitted “to read from the Bible as an example of literature.” And only about one third knew that a public school teacher is permitted to offer a class comparing the world’s religions.

 The survey’s authors concluded that there was “widespread confusion” about “the line between teaching and preaching.” Mr. Smith said the survey appeared to be the first comprehensive effort at assessing the basic religious knowledge of Americans, so it is impossible to tell whether they are more or less informed than in the past. The phone interviews were conducted in English and Spanish in May and June.

There were not enough Muslim, Buddhist or Hindu respondents to say how those groups ranked. Clergy members who are concerned that their congregants know little about the essentials of their own faith will no doubt be appalled by some of these findings.

 Fifty-three percent of Protestants could not identify Martin Luther as the man who started the Protestant Reformation.

Forty-five percent of Catholics did not know that their church teaches that the consecrated bread and wine in holy communion are not merely symbols, but actually become the body and blood of Christ.

Forty-three percent of Jews did not know that Maimonides, one of the foremost rabbinical authorities and philosophers, was Jewish. The question about Maimonides was the one that the fewest people answered correctly. But 51 percent knew that Joseph Smith was Mormon, and 82 percent knew that Mother Teresa was Roman Catholic. This article has been revised to reflect the following correction: Correction: September 29, 2010 An article on Tuesday about a poll in which Americans fared poorly in answering questions about religion misspelled the name of a beatified Roman Catholic nun and Nobel Peace Prize winner. She was Mother Teresa, not Theresa. A version of this article appeared in print on September 28, 2010, on page A17 of the New York edition.

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: September 28, 2010

Read More

A Christian Deist's View of Bible Study and Prayer

I have written other essays relating to the practice of Christian deism as a personal religion. In the essay, "Christian Deism as a Personal Religion," I focused on what it means to "love God" and "love neighbor" as we live each day. I also focused on repentance by us, and our forgiveness of others. In the essay, "Christian Deists: Christians Without Churches," I focused on the meaning of worship "in spirit and in truth." In this essay, I will try to address the subjects of Bible study and prayer in the practice of Christian deism. In regard to "Bible study," my focus as a Christian deist is on the teachings of Jesus found in the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the New Testament.

Preceding these books in the "Bible" is the Hebrew Bible, which Christians erroneously refer to as the "Old Testament." The Hebrew Bible presents the story of a primitive people (the Jews) struggling to survive in an environment of conflict with other nations. In that conflict, the Jewish leaders clearly believed that "might makes right" even if it meant the slaughter of innocent women and children of other nations in the Jews' pursuit of a land of their own (Numbers 31:13-17).

What makes this even worse is that this brutality was allegedly done in obedience to "God's will." Although there are some valuable passages in the "Old Testament," these are too few to be of much value to a Christian deist. Following the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, the book called "The Acts of the Apostles" provides some history about the early years of the Christian movement, at least as it was viewed by the writer about fifty years (or more) later.

The remainder of the "New Testament" includes letters that Paul (a Jew from Tarsus) wrote, expressing his interpretation of Christianity which varies significantly from the teachings of Jesus. Also included are some letters and books, by unknown writers, reflecting late first Christian century theology, much of which was influenced by Paul. Finally, in the New Testament, there is a book called "Revelation" predicting an imminent end of the world to encourage persecuted Christians to hope for a "new heaven and a new earth" after the destruction of "evil doers."

 This fantasy writing continues to inspire modern-day "end-of-the-world" fanatics to lead their followers to disappointment (at best) and destruction (at worst). Christian deists should view this book as useless. In reading the books of the New Testament, a Christian deist must put each idea to the test of reason. The basic theology of Paul, with his idea of the crucifixion of Jesus being a sacrifice to pay for the sins of humankind, should be summarily dismissed. However, a Christian deist can identify with Paul's statements about faith, hope, and love in the letter called First Corinthians, chapter 13.

Unfortunately, the scope of Paul's love did not include persons of a different sexual orientation. In studying the life and teachings of Jesus, a Christian deist should keep in mind that Jesus was a human being like ourselves. Some of his ideas simply express the cultural views common among Jews two thousand years ago in a pre-scientific age.

Some ideas, such as "demons" causing epilepsy, have no validity. The idea of a "devil" tempting and misleading people is also a sign of that time, and has no place in a religion based on reason. Let me say this clearly: If you find an idea in the Bible that does not seem reasonable to you, you do not have to believe it.

God gave you a mind to use, so use it. 

 In the New Testament, it is clear that Jesus began his career as a Jewish revolutionary who was seeking liberation of the Jews from the Romans, but Jesus gradually came to recognize that the rulership of God (the "kingdom of God") on earth would not become a reality by military force but by the gradual recognition of God's laws "in the heart" of individuals. This concept was too "unorthodox" for his compatriots to accept at the time, but Jesus' view of the "kingdom of God" came to be understood later when Jesus' teachings, especially his parables, were collected. Now, let us think about prayer. What is the meaning of prayer to me as a Christian deist? Put quite simply, prayer is communion with God. Jesus taught that "God is spirit" and it is the "spirit that gives life" to us as individuals (John 4:24 and 6:63). In other words, the essence of God and our own being is spirit. This is not an idea that originated with Jesus. Ancient Greek philosophers, such as Heraclitus over 500 years before Jesus, recognized that a "creative intelligence" (they called "logos") was responsible for the creation of order in the world, and for the creation of "intelligence" in individual human beings.

In other words, there is a "Mind" which we call "God" and we each have a "mind" through which we can communicate "mind-to-Mind." Prayer was important to Jesus, and we can learn much from how Jesus prayed. Usually, Jesus prayed by himself, away from the company of others (Matthew 14:23; Matthew 26:36; Luke 6:12).

Sometimes Jesus prayed in the presence of a few close friends (Luke 9:28; John 17:1).

Jesus cautioned against making a public display of prayer (Matthew 6:5) and he urged his disciples to "go into your room and shut the door and pray to your Father who is in secret" (Matthew 6:6).

 Jesus urged his disciples to pray simply. He said, "And in praying, do not heap up empty phrases .... for your Father knows what you need before you ask him" (Matthew 6:7-8). Some Christians have a misconception about prayer based on their reading of Jesus' statement (Mark 11:24),

 "Therefore I tell you, whatever you ask in prayer, believe that you will receive it, and you will." Many Christians are disappointed when they fail to receive what they pray for. Some blame themselves for not having a strong enough "faith," or belief that they will receive what they have prayed for. Others blame God for failing to keep Jesus' promise. The truth is that Jesus often taught by hyperbole (exaggeration). In the verses preceding Mark 11:24, Jesus told his disciples, "Have faith in God. Truly, I say to you, whoever says to this mountain, 'be taken up and cast into the sea,' and does not doubt in his heart, but believes that what he says will come to pass, it will be done for him" (Mark 11:22-23).

This is an example of a hyperbole to express the importance of faith in God when we pray. But even Jesus did not believe that whatever he prayed for would come to pass. In the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus prayed that he would not die ("let this cup pass from me"), but he prefaced his prayer request with the words, "If it be possible" (Matthew 26:39).

Here, Jesus recognized that sometimes what he asked for in prayer was not possible. We, too, must accept the fact that sometimes what we seek is not possible. Nevertheless, we may not know what is possible or not possible, so we should express our hopes in prayer.

Believing that something is possible may be a deciding factor in something becoming a reality. Personal faith has been proven to be a factor in healing some illnesses, but not all illnesses can be healed by faith. And faith healing is not a substitute for medical treatment.

 To me, prayer is more than just "talking" to God. It is also "listening" to God. I do not mean that God's voice will come "out of the clouds," but I am convinced that God can help us think of some solutions to our problems. Prayer provides a means of focusing our attention on problems in a way that may open our minds to possible solutions.

I have prayed about a problem at bedtime and have awakened to find a possible solution in my mind the next morning. Perhaps this is the way God communicates with us. I also believe that prayer is a channel through which we can receive strength to cope with our problems. Jesus told his disciples to "pray that you may have strength" so they would not be "weighed down with dissipation and drunkenness and cares of this life" (Luke 21:34-36).

The Hebrew psalmist wrote, "God is our refuge and strength, a very present help in trouble" (Psalm 46:1).

 I believe that prayer is not just "communication" with God. Prayer is COMMUNION with God. In some way when we direct our thoughts to God in prayer, we join our individual spirit with the Spirit that gives us life. The Hebrew psalmist claimed that God spoke these words, "Be still and know that I am God" (Psalm 46:10).

Without saying a word, we can pray by just being still and knowing that God is with us. Jesus taught his disciples to pray by giving them an example which we call the "Lord's Prayer." "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be Thy name. Thy kingdom come, Thy will be done on earth as it is in heaven; Give us this day our daily bread; And forgive us our sins, as we forgive those who sin against us; And lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil" (Matthew 6:9-13).

 As we know, Jesus viewed God as being like a loving father. In this prayer, Jesus distinguishes God from a human father by referring to God as a heavenly Father.

Then Jesus expresses respect for the sacred authority of God by using the words "hallowed" (sacred) and "name" (authority). Then Jesus gets to the heart of the prayer by seeking the coming of God's kingdom (rule) on earth, which Jesus equates with "God's will."

 The request for "daily bread" is a recognition of the fact that we are dependent on God for the very basics for life (such as bread) that come from what God provides (such as seed, earth, rain).

This recognition of God's gifts is also an implied expression of thanksgiving to God for these provisions. Thanksgiving should always be a part of our prayers. The request for God's forgiveness of our sins (our failures to love others) is directly tied to our obligation to forgive those who repent of their sins against us.

 Finally, the prayer concludes with a request for strength to resist temptation to do evil, and a request for help in protecting ourselves against those who would do evil against us. This prayer is a good model to guide us in our own praying. This short essay certainly does not cover all that should be said about Bible study and prayer, but I hope that it is enough to suggest an approach consistent with our beliefs as Christian deists.

Read More

This is What Deists Believe About Forgiveness

I have always believed in forgiveness, (or at least I think I always thought I had - at the very least as a civilized value). To believe in a value, however, and to practice it are two entirely different things as I came to find out. Ultimately I came to practice it because I was forced to face the harm that was done to me when I was abused as a child. This was forced upon me by a mental breakdown and it made me realise that I needed to heal from what had been done to me. I found the only way I could do that was through appropriate therapy and ultimately forgiving. As a result I became a social worker and then a therapeutic foster mother for severely abused children, three of whom I adopted. I thought I had always believed in forgiveness but that turned out not to be the case. Or at least not in the way I now understand forgiveness to mean. I came to believe in forgiveness because for me it was the only way out of my mental torment. It was the only choice I had. To give up the anger and hatred and let it go. Let go of the bitterness and the wish I had to hurt the people who had hurt me.

I think here we need to define what I mean by forgiveness. For me it means simply that the desire to take revenge against the event/person who hurt you has been let go of and that the event/person you are forgiving ceases to dominate your life. It means in that sense that you regain your own power again and that you are in charge of your life - not the event/person who hurt you. It means you are free to go forward with peace of mind and not let your life be dominated by hurtful events/persons from the past. It means you still retain the capacity to love.

Most of all you forgive to help heal yourself - not to set the other person free. The only person who can ultimately free that person from their own guilt, (if they feel any), is themselves. It may help them if you let them know that you forgive them and there is nothing to stop you from doing that, (providing you do not get re-abused in the process), but in my view it is not necessary for your own healing. Neither is it a moral imperative.

It is important for me to establish that, for me, forgiveness can never be considered a moral imperative. I believe forgiveness is preferable in the sense that it is a gift you give yourself to help you heal - I believe it is the ultimate gift of love to yourself and in that to the world. However I believe it can never be mandated. It cannot be something that any outside agency tells you you should or must do. That would simply be cruel. It would be putting yet another burden on someone who is already broken and hurting. It is also psychological nonsense. People heal at their own pace and will forgive if, and when, they are ready. It cannot be forced.

Also, forgiving the other person does not mean that you absolve them of any responsibility for what they have done. It if did, what would there be to forgive? It doesn't mean you need to be high and mighty and judgemental either - how can anyone say for certainty that if they had walked in that hurtful persons shoes that they would not have turned out the way they did? I say no-one can say this truly.
It also doesn't mean that you should be high and mighty about the fact that you can forgive when others can't. If anything, the fact they cannot forgive means that they are still hurting. Surely the most loving response when anyone is hurting is to show them compassion? If you can forgive it means you are fortunate, not morally superior.

Forgiveness does not mean that the other person cannot be punished or should not be rehabilitated for what they have done - or that you cannot desire this outcome. That is a desire for justice and not revenge. It would be a poorer world if there was no justice in it.
I think a lot of confusion comes about concerning forgiveness because of the Christian, (and perhaps other religious views), on it. In this I will concentrate on the Christian perspective because it is the one I know best.

A lot of the moral revulsion I think that many people feel concerning forgiveness, (and they do), comes into play because of the Christian take on forgiveness. It leads people to think that forgiveness is what goody two shoes type of people do. To waft around with ones hands in the air saying "I forgive you" to people is morally repugnant and the height of insufferable arrogance. Some-one said this to me recently and I commented, "Good for you. I hope it feels good because I do not need your forgiveness. The only forgiveness I need is the forgiveness I give to myself". The man concerned was a fundamentalist Christian and his attitude made me feel physically sick, to put it bluntly. If he had told me that his God forgave me, I think I would really have put him right. That is because I am a Deist. While I believe there is a Cosmic Intelligence, (or what some might call God), who created the world, he, (for want of a better word), has absolutely no interest in forgiving me or not. That is because he created me with intelligence and Reason by which I could work out that psychologically it was better for my mental health and my life if I did forgive. I have no need of a supernatural agency to forgive me.

I was brought up a Christian and as such was taught the Lord's Prayer. The bit where it says "Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive those who trespass against us" could, in my opinion, be replaced with a more Reasoned Deist understanding and this would be it: "We acknowledge that we cannot expect to live in a world where other people try to live with love and practise forgiveness if we are not at least willing to try and do this ourselves." Note I suggest the intention to try and do these things. People's capacity to love and forgive are variable because of their own situation but at least a willingness to try cannot be expected if we are not willing to try it ourselves.
My commitment to forgiveness was tested to the limit when on the 7th July 2005 I was on the platform of a tube station when it was bombed. I was severely injured and still to all intents and purposes I cannot walk to this day. (I can hobble a few feet in pain and with assistance). I am effectively confined to a mobility scooter when I go out and a wheelchair when inside and am in constant but variable pain. The bombings of the 7th July 2005 also ultimately killed my husband who I loved very much. It also injured a close friend of mine who is now my principal carer. But could I forgive?

I have to admit it has been a long and hard struggle but I finally have come to know that I forgive my attackers. And I know it for the simple reason I would never wish what happened to me to happen to them or anyone else and it has made my commitment to non-violence, except in situations of self-defense, absolutely resolute. I would not wish the pain I felt and still feel even on my worst enemy. And for me that is my understanding of forgiveness. I am at some sort of peace now. And my physical pain eases when I forgive and am not full of anger.

I have come to learn though that forgiven is not a static state. It is a dynamic state. It is not a destination. It is a journey and on my journey I explored reasons as to why what had happened to me actually did happened to me. What was the ultimate meaning of it?
On my journey to find answers to this question I went on a spiritual quest and investigated most of the world's religions and belief systems and I rejected them all. I was not bombed because it was my "karma" and had been bad in a previous life. I had not been bombed because my soul required "lessons" and I had "attracted" it. I was not bombed because of Satan being in the world, (he doesn't exist by the way), and I had not been bombed because it was an act of God. Why would a loving God want me to be bombed - to strengthen my character as some religious people suggested? Would any loving parent deliberately hurt their child so their "character" got strengthened? My Reasoned answer would be no.

No, the reason I got bombed was because there are evil people in the world and I was in the wrong place at the wrong time and the bombs obeyed the laws of physics. Laws that had been put in place by our Creator and had been misused by people with warped minds. How could anyone claiming to follow a religion "revealed" by God plant a bomb to maim and kill ordinary people just going about their everyday life? (And in this I am not singling out Islam. All the three so called "revealed" Abrahamic religions: Judaism, Christianity and Islam have a history of bloodshed and violence - so no-one in this respect is historically morally superior to the other).
However, it made me think there must be a problem because if the God of love, (which I trust our Creator is), could not be found in the "revealed" religions or in any of the other belief systems, all of which have their own superstitions of faith healing, miracles and supernatural entities etc., where could he be found?

I loved and marvelled at Nature. I also believed in Science. I tried to become an Atheist because, truthfully, I had met some marvellous and loving Atheists who helped me in my healing from the bombing and losing my husband. I knew because of them that belief in religion and supernatural entities were not needed to be kind and loving. It seemed to be an inherent, (if somewhat collectively underdeveloped), quality of human nature. Yet where had that human nature come from? Why didn't conscious beings, if they were just collections of chemicals subject to physical laws just turn out to be violent, self - centered and aggressive? Also why were these conscious beings endowed with Reason? Where did that come from? A collection of chemicals does not need to develop either consciousness or Reason. Also, I still saw an Intelligence in Nature. Nature did not create itself. So there must have been behind all that a Creator of some kind.

It was paradoxically whilst reading the book "The God Delusion" by the famous English Atheist Richard Dawkins that I first came across the concept of Deism. That lead me to the Internet and the World Union of Deists. And I knew I had come home. That's what I was - I was a Deist and the rest, as they say, is history.

I knew that God had given me Reason that had lead me to work out that forgiveness was the way out of my mental hell caused by the bombings. And Reason, that caused me to be able to garner my emotions and rise above my baser instincts, was my evidence of God. It was also in the science and evidence based conventional and complimentary medicine that was helping to heal my physical pain.
So now, still, every day I am on the journey of forgiveness but I know that my God given reason will help me through. That then is what forgiveness is for me as a Deist. A function of Reason. Our Creator's most precious gift after life itself.

It was given to us by our Creator to help us heal, not given as a moral mandate. Forgiveness was given to us as a gift to, through Reason, help heal us. But only we, including Deists, can choose whether we make use of that gift or not.

Read More

Here's What Deism Really Is

Deism is a well-established theology with a long history. It is said to originate in the Age of Enlightenment, according to Wikipedia, but it could be argued that it goes all the way back to the days of the great Greek philosophers. It was popular with several of the American Founding Fathers, including Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson and more, and is experiencing a resurgence.

Thomas Paine once said “God exists, and there it lies.” This brilliant man summed up Deist theology in a single sentence, and demonstrated the simplicity of Deist belief. This simple phrase illustrated his belief in a Creator while simultaneously stating that anything else you may have heard about God has been invented by men.

What do Deists believe?

Put simply, Deism is the belief in a Creator of the Universe and that the Deity that created it wants us to be good to each other. The Church of Deism teaches that the Deity fashioned a masterful sculpture we call the Universe, but for a mere human to try to comprehend their Creator is like the stone in Michelangelo’s David attempting to understand the artist himself. The doctrine of the Church of Deism is based on individualist theological values, and states that all peaceful religious philosophy has equal validity, or more accurately equal invalidity, because no beliefs in the realm of spirituality can be proven over another. Indeed, none can be proven at all. Deism is known as the Religion of Reason.

Most Deists believe that all religious doctrine was written by man and that the proof is self-evident, but we give respect and understanding to the peaceful beliefs of others regardless. That is not to say that members can’t point out and discuss the dangerous practices of revealed religions, however. In fact, a favorite pastime of Deists is pointing out inconsistencies, hazards and hypocrisies of organized religion. As Deists we strive to remain respectful to individuals who hold beliefs we don’t agree with, but the religions themselves enjoy no such protection. It could be said that we have our own version of the phrase “Love the sinner, hate the sin.”
Because of this, peaceful followers of Christianity, Hinduism, Wicca, Islam, and every other spiritual belief are looked upon only as fellow souls seeking the truth regarding the origins of the universe and subsequently, mankind. Due to the individualist nature of the Church, spirituality beyond the existence of a Creator is accepted or rejected by the person’s own proclivities.

That being said, members of the Church of Deism have a well-founded suspicion of organized religion as a whole. One only needs to open a history book or read the latest headlines to see that organized religion has a sometimes simultaneous capacity of great good and incredible evil. The difference usually only depends on which way the winds of the day were blowing, and who claimed to be the keeper of the sacred knowledge. The Crusades, witch burnings, and Jihad are all prime examples of the terrible harm that organized religions have brought upon the human race throughout time.

The Church of Deism recognizes the existence of the Creator as self-evident. One only has to feel the emotion of love, see the smile of an innocent child, observe the complexities of DNA, or watch the graceful movements of a tree in the breeze to see divine inspiration. The Church also teaches that the need for humanity to get along is self-evident too. Some say that organized religion is good because it demonstrates the differences between right and wrong, but Deists attest that morality is self-evident as well. Unlike many organized religions, our members debate the validity of moral issues that injure no one.

Can I become a Deist?

Yes. Anyone 13 years of age and over can become a member of the congregation of the Church of Deism. There is no requirement, or even a request to attend religious services but Deists are free to attend any religious ceremonies they choose of any religious persuasion while seeking the path to enlightenment. All Congregants have unlimited access to the news announcements, articles, and are encouraged to share in the fellowship available at the Church Forum. Differences of opinion are welcome. It is free to join the congregation of the Church of Deism.

Can I become a Deistic minister?

All men and women over the age of 13 may become ordained in the Church of Deism at no charge. One only has to fill out the Ordination form completely and honestly.

A minister of Deism may officiate weddings, funerals and baptisms, perform prison ministry, and take confessions. Ministers may also recruit other congregants and prospective ministers to the faith. Your level of involvement is your decision, and the methods used to perform these tasks are up to you. All 50 states recognize the religion of Deism, but there are some counties that have different requirements for marriage officiants. Prospective Deistic Ministers outside of the United States will have to check their own local laws.

You may choose your own honorary title such as Reverend, Pastor, Rabbi or whatever you like, but ultimately, the choice is yours. You may not call yourself a doctor.

The Church can provide you with a Letter of Good Standing if you need it to perform a wedding, but contact your local County Clerk to find out if it is required before ordering. Chances are your Certificate of Ordination is good enough, and many places won’t even require that.

Not all members of the congregation may wish to have the additional responsibilities of ordination due to personal reasons or age restrictions, but of course all Deistic Ministers are welcome to become members of the congregation. Your ordination is good for as long as you remain a Deist.

Doesn’t it violate Deistic doctrine to organize Deists?

The Church of Deism recognizes the possible dangers of organized religion because we are ardent students of history, however the Church has no problem with like-minded individuals gathering in fellowship to discuss the Mystery of the Creator.

Is there a brick and mortar Church of Deism?

Deistic belief precludes the need for a central church for its congregation, so there is no physical church to attend. Congregants are welcome to join in fellowship in the Church Forum and gain inspiration from the various topics and articles. Because of the dangers of organized religion, congregants are encouraged to practice their faith as they see fit, following the path of Deism alone or with others. Some Deists believe that worshiping a Creator is a necessary part of spiritual enlightenment, however most do not. If you feel that communion with your Deity through prayer or fellowship brings you closer together, by all means do so.

Why the internet?

This is the 21st century. Virtually all churches have a website because it is the future of spreading the word. In a world of declining church memberships and various church scandals, the world wide web may someday be the only place to find a church where you feel comfortable. Others may want to attend church, but for a myriad of reasons aren’t able to. The Church of Deism realizes this and coupled with a reluctance to engage in anything approaching organized, or “revealed” religion, feels it is the best option. Because real human interaction of some kind will naturally always remain the Church feels that it is important to ordain Ministers to maximize interpersonal relationships with the congregation.

Can I belong to a “traditional” or organized religion and still be a Deist?

Yes, but the Church of Deism doesn’t see it as important to maintaining Deistic spiritual beliefs, and depending on the religion may actually run counter to Deistic thought. Avoid any religious service that advocates hate or violence in particular, as you become especially susceptible to the most dangerous aspects of organized religion if you do.

Celebrate your own individualism by not running with the herd. By its age, history, and past memberships alone it could be argued that Deism itself is a traditional religion, but many historic adherents of Deism were members of other churches. Einstein was Jewish. Thomas Jefferson was an Episcopalian. Thomas Paine was a Quaker. If membership in another “traditional” religion enhances your spirit, follow your heart. Deism exists to propel the Human Race forward, not to hold us all back.

Read More

The Essence of Deism

The word "Deism" is derived from the Latin word for God, "Deus."

Deism is a natural religion. Deists believe in the existence of God, on purely rational grounds, without any reliance on revealed religion or religious authority or holy text. Because of this, Deism is quite different from religions like Judaism, Christianity and Islam. The latter are based on revelations from God to prophet(s) who then taught it to humans. We like to call natural religions by the title "bottom-up" faiths and revealed religions as "top-down."

The opposite of Deism is Atheism - the lack of a belief in god(s).

As Deists, we must not accept the belief of most religions that God revealed himself to humanity through the writings of the Bible, the Qur'an or other religious texts.

Disagree with strong Atheists who assert that there is no evidence of the existence of God.

Many Deists reason that since everything that exists has had a creator, then the universe itself must have been created by God:

Thomas Paine concluded a speech shortly after the French Revolution with

"God is the power of first cause, nature is the law, and matter is the subject acted upon."

In his book The Age of Reason, Thomas Paine wrote

"Everything we behold carries in itself the internal evidence that it did not make itself." This includes trees, plants, humans and other animals. This conclusion carries us on "... to the belief of a first cause eternally existing ... this first cause, man calls God."

Antony Flew (1923-), a son of a Methodist minister was once a leading Atheist. Later in life, he accepted the existence of God on the basis of design in the universe. In 2004, he became a Deist while still rejecting the gods promoted by the various revealed religions. He wrote

"How can a universe of mindless matter produce beings with intrinsic ends, self replication capabilities and coded chemistry?"
 
Reference: Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason. Reviewed by Dr. Ben Johnson, Doctor of Divinity-Original author unknown.

Read More

9 Things Every Deist Should Know

While there are no "official" tenets of Deism, many of the following "unofficial" tenets might be the best way to introduce generally accepted beliefs within Deism. The unofficial tenets of Deism are:

1. Belief in God based on Reason, Experience and Nature (nature of the universe) rather than on the basis of pure faith, holy texts and divine revelation. Essentially, through the use of Reason, God’s existence is revealed by the observation of the order and complexity found within nature and our personal experiences.

2. Belief that the nature of God is generally incomprehensible and is beyond definition for humanity at this time. Furthermore, human language is limited and inadequate to define God; however, man can use Reason to theorize and speculate on what this possible nature is.

3. Belief that man’s relationship with God is impersonal and abstract. However, this does not create a feeling of a distant and cold deity but of one in which God has a profound and unfathomable relationship with all of creation (nature) rather than just one aspect of it.

4. Belief that humanity has the ability to use Reason to develop ethical/moral principles and through the application of Reason these principles can be used to implement moral behavior, which in turn creates a Utilitarian-Humanist morality. Essentially, humans can be guided by their conscience in matters of morality.

5. Belief that humans have the individual capability of experiencing God, which is defined as spirituality. These spiritual experiences are multifaceted and all of humanity has the innate capability to have these experiences. Essentially, each human is capable of having a profound experience of God and nature.

6. Belief that God should be honored in a way that the individual beliefs is best and most appropriate for them. Individuals must determine for themselves how best to honor God and only they can develop how to accomplish this. For many, it is a multifaceted and an individualized process.

7. Belief in the principle of Natural Law that states that all men and women are created equal to each other with inherent freedom and liberty so that no human has more worth than another. Essentially, each human is equal in terms of the freedoms that they have and in the eyes of the law.

8. Belief that mankind’s purpose is to use our reason to understand what it means to be alive in every sense of the word (to live life to the fullest) and to act in such a way as to secure human happiness and contentment for all involved.

9. Belief that Reason and Respect are traits to mankind and that we are to utilize them in all aspects of our daily lives thus creating a pragmatic approach to life. This includes respecting other alternative views and opinions of God (other religions) as long as they do not produce harm and/or infringe upon others.

---

The Deist's Glossary

Cult: In Deism, a cult is an embracing of unreasonable beliefs by a group of people. Based on this definition, Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all cults because their members suspend their reason in order to believe or accept the unreasonable dogmatic teachings and superstitions such as God giving real estate as a gift to the Jews, the resurrection and ascension of Jesus, faith-healing (as just one example of being a superstition, if was REAL innocent helpless children would not be dying from the attempts of their parents at Biblical ) and Mohammad's ascension to heaven, among many more false and unreasonable claims. Because Deism always promotes free and independent thought and reason, it is impossible for Deism to become a cult.

Deism: Deism is the recognition of a universal creative force greater than that demonstrated by mankind, supported by personal observation of laws and designs in nature and the universe, perpetuated and validated by the innate ability of human reason coupled with the rejection of claims made by individuals and organized religions of having received special divine revelation.

Faith: This word has been so terribly abused by "revealed" religions that it has come too really mean the suspension of an individual’s reason in order to accept, or at least to tolerate, an unreasonable claim made by a "revealed" religion. It is the only way "revealed" religions can get people to accept such insane and unreasonable claims and ideas as original sin, walking on water, healing the sick without medical care, splitting the Red Sea, etc. Deists prefer to use the word "trust" instead of faith due to the twisted meaning the word "faith" has acquired after centuries of abuse from the "revealed" religions.

One key difference between Deism and the "revealed" religion is that Deist 't believe faith is required to believe in God. This quote from Voltaire sums it up, "What is faith? Is it to believe that which is evident? No. It is perfectly evident to my mind that there exists a necessary, eternal, supreme, and intelligent being. This is no matter of faith, but of reason."

God: The universal creative force which is the source of the laws and designs found throughout Nature.

Intelligent Design: Intelligent Design refers to the structures in Nature, such as that of DNA, which can be observed and the complexity of which required an intelligent Designer. In this context "structure" means something arranged in a definite pattern of organization. In Deism, Intelligent Design has absolutely nothing to do with the unreasonable Biblical myth of creation.

Natural Religion: Belief in God based on the application of reason on the laws/designs of Nature as opposed to revealed religion which is based on alleged revelations.

Philosophy: The study of the truths and principles of being, knowledge, or conduct.

Reason: The mental powers used with forming conclusions or inferences based on facts. Deists look at reason as the second greatest gift from Nature's God to humanity, second only to life itself.

Religion: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature and purpose of the universe.

Revelation: The act of revealing or of making known. In the religious sense, revelation usually means divine revelation. This is meaningless, since revelation can only be revelation in the first instance. For example, if God revealed something to me, that would be a divine revelation to me. If I then told someone else what God told me it would be mere hearsay to the person I tell. If that person believed what I said, they would not be putting their trust in God, but in me, believing what I told them was actually true.

Revealed Religion: An organized system of belief in and worship of God based on the belief that God communicated/communicates with certain individual founders/members of the particular revealed religion. As mentioned above, by believing in any of the revealed religions a believer is not putting their trust in God, but in the person/people making the claim of receiving the divine revelation.

Trust: Trust is confidence in a person or thing based on reason and experience.

Frequently Asked Questions about Deism

What is the basis of Deism?

Reason and nature. We see the design found throughout the known universe and this realization brings us to a sound belief in a Designer or God. 

Is Deism a form of atheism?

No. Atheism teaches that there is no God. Deism teaches there is a God. Deism rejects the "revelations" of the "revealed" religions but does not reject God.

If Deism teaches a belief in God, then what is the difference between Deism and the other religions like Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc.?

Deism is, as stated above, based on nature and reason, not "revelation." All the other religions (with the possible exception of Taoism, although superstition does play a role in both Buddhism and Taoism) make claim to special divine revelation or they have requisite "holy" books.

Deism has neither. In Deism there is no need for a preacher, priest or rabbi. All one needs in Deism is their own common sense and the creation to contemplate.

Also, "revealed" religions, especially Christianity and Islam, use greed and fear to catch and hold converts. The greed is belonging to their "revealed" religion so you can get rewards such as eternal life, and in Christianity, anything you ask for. In combination with greed they use fear of death. Deism does neither. Deism teaches that we should do what is right simply because it's the right thing to do. And Deism doesn't pretend we know what, if anything, happens to us after our bodies die. We love and trust God enough not to worry about it. As Thomas Paine wrote, "I consider myself in the hands of my Creator, and that He will dispose of me after this life consistently with His justice and goodness. I leave all these matter to Him, as my Creator and friend, and I hold it to be presumption in man to make an article of faith as to what the Creator will do with us hereafter."

Do Deists believe that God created the creation and the world and then just stepped back from it?

Some Deists do and some believe God may intervene in human affairs. For example, when George Washington was faced with either a very risky evacuation of the American troops from Long Island or surrendering them, he chose the more risky evacuation. When questioned about the possibility of having them annihilated he said it was the best he could do and the rest was up to Providence. 

Do Deists pray?

Only prayers of thanks and appreciation. We don't dictate to God.

Are there Deist rituals, vows, etc.?

No. Since Deism does not attempt to control people, there is no need for rituals. Regarding vows, like wedding vows or words at a funeral, we believe they are too important to the individuals involved to have been written by anyone else. Deists are too independent to rely on a member of the clergy to do these important things for them.

How do Deists view God?

We view God as an eternal entity whose power is equal to his/her will. The following quote from Albert Einstein also offers a good Deistic description of God: "My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who reveals himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe, forms my idea of God."

Is Deism a cult?

It's impossible for Deism to be a cult because Deism teaches self-reliance and encourages people to constantly use their reason. Deism teaches to "question authority" no matter what the cost.

Unlike the revealed religions, Deism makes no unreasonable claims. The revealed religions encourage people to give up, or at least to suspend, their God-given reason. They like to call it faith. For example, how logical is it to believe that Moses parted the Red Sea, or that Jesus walked on water, or that Mohammed received the Koran from an angel?

Suspending your reason enough to believe these tales only sets a precedent that leads to believing a Jim Jones or David Koresh.

What's Deism's answer to all the evil in the world?

Much of the evil in the world could be overcome or removed if humanity had embraced our God-given reason from our earliest evolutionary stages. After all, all the laws of nature that we've discovered and learned to use to our advantage that make everything from computers to medicine to space travel realities, have existed eternally. But we've decided we'd rather live in superstition and fear instead of learning and gaining knowledge. It's much more soothing to believe we're not responsible for our own actions than to actually do the hard work required for success.

Deism doesn't claim to have all the answers to everything, we just claim to be on the right path to those answers.

Read More

Deism's Relationship with Christianity

I thought it would be interesting to consider what Deism shares with the Christian religion. This topic could be a bit tricky because Deists have no set of codified beliefs. We consider ourselves to be free-thinkers, so we don’t tell each other what to believe. But, in a nutshell, Deists believe in God as revealed in nature, and then use reason to determine for ourselves our other personal beliefs and practices. This makes me reluctant to speak for all Deists everywhere, so I’ll just share the similarities that I know of.

 In the first place, modern Deism grew out of Christianity. The earliest Deists, at least in America, were members of churches, usually Anglican. They believed in God. They appreciated and tried to follow Jesus’ teachings, especially the Golden Rule and the importance of loving God and others (something I still hold to). But they also realized that the Church held to many beliefs which just didn’t seem to line up with progressive human understanding. For instance, they questioned the doctrine of the Virgin Birth because everyone knows it takes a male and a female to produce a child. They didn't believe that God impregnates people. They questioned the Christian doctrine that everyone is born evil (Original Sin). They also rejected the doctrine of Substitutionary Atonement, the notion that Jesus had to die in order for God to forgive our sins. So while the Deists affirmed the reality of the Creator and the core teachings of Jesus Christ, they dared to question whether or not Church doctrines or biblical doctrines really line up with reality, with how we know the world really works. But they still affirmed, along with Christians, that God is real and that Jesus taught us how to live good lives.

 Another strong tie that Deism has with what Jesus taught is a reverence for nature. Many, if not most, of Jesus’ parables concerned nature – plants, seeds, tree, water, fire, farming, the sun, the wind. He was quite the “country boy” and used stories about nature to illustrate what human relationships to God and to each other should look like. Like Jesus, Deists looked around them at nature and found, not only evidence for God, but spiritual lessons that can teach us how to love, appreciate, and care for one another.

 Many Deists consider Jesus to be a great teacher, perhaps an extremely enlightened person who had keen insight into how to relate to God as a Father and to humanity as brothers and sisters. Deists also strongly believe in Jesus’ social gospel of helping others. And many Deists, though not all, believe in some sort of afterlife, another subject that Christianity focuses on.

 If Christianity consisted only of the central teachings of Jesus concerning loving God and others, many Deists might consider themselves to be Christians. But Christianity has added many, many other doctrines to its religion over the years that go far beyond what Jesus taught, and Deists find many of these added doctrines to often be irrational, superstitious, and sometimes harmful. Because of all the “extra baggage” that Christianity currently has, most Deists would probably not choose to self-identify as Christians.

 As I mentioned in Part 1, Deism in America began in the Church, within Christianity. But it also had a bit of a “love/hate” relationship with Christianity that has not quite abated. Deists affirmed, along with Christians, that God is our Creator and that the creation is good and shows God’s handiwork. And it also often affirmed the central teachings of Jesus about loving God, loving others, and making our world a better place. But it didn’t agree with the Church that all knowledge was confined to the Bible. It didn’t agree with the Church that we had nothing left to learn about ourselves or our universe other than what the Church or the Bible says. Deists embraced the “new knowledge” of the Enlightenment, advances gained in the fields of science, medicine, astronomy, sociology, and even psychology. Deists strongly felt that God was the source of all truth and that God has continued to lead us into truths that people in the Bible days just weren’t privy to. Can you imagine trying to explain to a Roman soldier or a Jewish peasant how an inoculation shot works? Deists embraced these advances in the sciences and in the arts, even in theology (how we think about God), and felt that humanity needed to grow up and out of some of the superstitions of the past.

The Church, to a large degree, was extremely slow in accepting any new knowledge. It felt that everything God wanted us to know was either found in the Bible (for Protestants) or found in the Vatican (for Catholics) or found in the Church Fathers (for Eastern Orthodox). Granted, the Church has made some strides over the last few decades, but let’s be honest, it only recently allowed for inter-racial marriages and it still is opposed to gays “because the Bible says so.” Deists don’t feel that all knowledge is confined to the Bible or the Church. They feel that God teaches us through everything in life and that we should never stop growing. Our beliefs, think most Deists, should come from what we think, given the information and wisdom available to us now, not just residual knowledge held onto simply because people 2000 years ago believed they knew all truth.

So this is where the relationship between Deism and Christianity can sometimes be strained. Deism accepts and incorporates new knowledge wherever it finds it, using reasoning as a measuring stick to judge truth. Christianity looks primarily to the past for what it believes is truth, to the way people thought and believed from 2000 to 4000 years ago. If you were sick, would you want to go to a doctor that only had the medical training from the first century? Or would you want a doctor with the latest in medical training? Similarly, if you want to understand God, would you consider only what people 2000 years ago had to say? Or would you want to consider other sources? Granted, some things from the past, many things in fact, are worth holding onto. But not if it no longer makes sense (like keeping women out of church pulpits) or if it is superstition (like believing God impregnates people) or if it is harmful, as many of the supposed commands of God in the Bible are.

Nevertheless, Deism usually does not wish to be “anti-Christian”. Christianity is a good religion, as far as it goes. But not everything in Christianity is good. And Deism wants to be known more for what it is for than what it is against.

By Bill McCracken 

Read More