Hi from Australia!

[ReasonedWay]

Hey SpiritSeeker! Dave Gaddis here. I remember you from PD and I contributed to Chuck's book as well. I sure miss him, especially when Facebook sends his birthday reminder each year.

I visited Australia a couple of times. It is a wonderful country. The people were so nice.

On the spiritual front, I am still deist in the sense that I conclude there is an intelligence behind the Universe. I have a basic God concept, but I no long spend a lot of time contemplating God. I try to focus, instead, on the practical ways a deists and live a reasoned life.

Anyway, glad you made it here!

[Gnomon]

Hey SpiritSeeker! Dave Gaddis here. I remember you from PD and I contributed to Chuck's book as well. I sure miss him, especially when Facebook sends his birthday reminder each year.

On the spiritual front, I am still deist in the sense that I conclude there is an intelligence behind the Universe. I have a basic God concept, but I no long spend a lot of time contemplating God. I try to focus, instead, on the practical ways a deists and live a reasoned life.

Dave
I recently stumbled across an old defunct website that's still up, and it had a long article by Chuck. I didn't make a bookmark, so I don't remember the URL.

I too, don't spend much time contemplating God, in the sense of worship. But I still make frequent reference to the Deist god-concept on my blog. That's because my personal worldview requires a divine Mind to create the world, from abstract quantum possibilities up to concrete macro realities. Beyond the creation event, everything in the physical world operates pretty much as Science says it does. It's the meta-physical (mental concepts, imagined ideas) world that Science doesn't yet have figured out. So, as an amateur philosopher, I spend a lot of my retirement time on trying to separate the practical aspects of a conscious world from the pseudo-scientific fantasies.

That's the purpose of a reasoned worldview, it's your personal model of how the world works, and serves as your guide in perplexing situations. If you believe in ghosts, then you will behave differently from those who don't. For example, many Deists are still uncertain whether to plan for an afterlife, and spend considerable time & energy worrying about it. And looking to other believers for mutual support. see Note below :

The point here is that a "reasoned" worldview needs to be supported either by evidence or by arguments. And on some topics, the evidence is moot. Which is why my blog serves as a sort of Moot Court to discuss the pros & cons. And this forum is a place to come before the court to make your case, or to deconstruct the other guy's theory.


Note : Most people in the world had little or no concept of an afterlife, until the Jewish Pharisees and Sadducees began to argue about it, and passed on their "reasoned" views to Christianity, and thence to Islam. They had little evidence to support their views, other than biblical exegesis. Lacking that resource, I depend on personal experience, and what little science there is. The jury is still out, but for all practical purposes, I don't see how it makes any difference in my everyday life. Of course, for those who also believe in Heaven and Hell, the uncertainty might make them sweat a bit.

[Gnomon]

Brad

I finally found my copy of Deist. So That's What I Am!. I wanted to see what you had written for that publication back in 2009. In your article, The Journey of Spiritseeker, you said that you were beginning to dabble in the Progressive Christianity movement. Wikipedia describes PC as a "post-liberal movement within Christianity". And you mentioned that "it allows for Christian Mysticism". So I was wondering if it was the mystical aspect that attracted you to PC, or simply the absence of regressive dogma. You admitted that "my head was still having Deist thoughts, and my heart was still longing for a more personal relationship with God".

Wiki also says that PC was "rooted in Enlightenment thinking", which was also the soil of the Deist movement. So, I can see why the rationalism & humanism of Deism appealed to you. However, you also indicated a belief in Jesus' teaching, and a need for inter-personal fellowship, both of which are not found in the current state of freethinking cyberspace Deism. [Note : like deist Thomas Jefferson, I can accept the progressive ideas of Jesus without swallowing the supernatural Christ-myth.]

Classical Deism was basically a reaction to the repressive Faith & Dogma of the Catholic Church, but otherwise it was similar to liberal Protestant thinking, in that at first, it retained belief in Monotheism, and continued some Christian traditions. However, philosophical Deists envisioned a non-intervening non-personal deity (no prayers, no miracles), and demoted Jesus to non-divine status (no trinity, no salvation).

In accordance with Enlightenment-era Science & Skepticism, Deism relied on ordinary human Reason for all knowledge, and rejected blind Faith in ancient infallible scriptures (no direct revelation). Hence, Deism typically rejected the miracles & mysticism in the Bible. As time went by, Deism became less dependent on the traditions of Christianity, and the teachings of Jesus. Consequently, the Neo-Deism I talk about in the BothAnd blog is almost completely divorced from those historical roots. [Note : Deists also typically reject Gnostic claims about direct non-rational knowledge of supernatural topics. As with Psychics, it's easy to fake such "knowing", because no one can prove you wrong.]

Neo-Deism is nothing more than a general idea at the moment. There is no actual church or even a face-to-face community of believers (in the abstract Creator of an autonomous evolving world). So, in this forum I have been proposing a way to take it to the next level, by mutually developing a "creation Myth", and a "Deist Creed", neither to be taken literally. With those key features, abstract philosophical Deism might begin to appeal to those more interested in concrete religious functions, such as local meetings and social services. As a practical communal religion, Neo-Deism would be essentially the same as Secular Humanism, with none of the supernatural features of traditional religions. Can you handle that? [Note : Neo-D won't provide any divine assurances to assuage existential fears & anxieties, other than the hard-hearted advice to "stop worrying about the next life, and enjoy this one while you can".]

For all practical purposes, the G*D of Neo-Deism is equivalent to capricious implacable Nature, because we have no knowledge of anything outside the natural world. That is, unless you accept the inspiration of scripture writers, or the mystical-ways-of-knowing claimed by Gnostics & Psychics. Only for philosophical purposes -- such as justification for ideal principles of physics and morality -- would the notion of a reality-creating super-natural deity apply. If we assume that the Creator designed our world according to He/r own non-human purposes, with no devil-god to spoil paradise, then what-is-is-what-ought-to-be. [Note : "create", "design",and "purpose" are metaphors for concepts beyond our understanding]

Therefore, Neo-D won't be much consolation to those who expect answered prayers, a guaranteed afterlife, or a way to communicate with the dearly departed. Those beliefs are not supported by empirical evidence, so as emotional-need-fillers they must be accepted on faith in questionable anecdotes, by those who are predisposed toward a mystical-magical side to mundane reality. For non-mystics, their Maslow needs must be met in ordinary ways by ordinary humans, with no divine dispensation of love from above. [Note : as I envision it, Neo-D is essentially Atheism with a reasonable explanation for the existence of Reality]

Neo-Deism though, as I envision it, is essentially a return to the "Enlightenment Values" that gave birth to the original Deist movement. It is also a rejection of the extreme liberal/leftist worldview of the "Postmodern Movement". Both of those topics are discussed in the blog. So, what do you think? Is Neo-Deism too far removed from Western & Eastern religious traditions to serve your human needs, and to satisfy your longing for spiritual connection? [Note : Neo-D is a spartan religion, so a philosophical boot-camp may be necessary to toughen-up those who depend on a mother-god for existential emotional support.]

[spiritseeker]

Hey SpiritSeeker! Dave Gaddis here. I remember you from PD and I contributed to Chuck's book as well. I sure miss him, especially when Facebook sends his birthday reminder each year.

I visited Australia a couple of times. It is a wonderful country. The people were so nice.

On the spiritual front, I am still deist in the sense that I conclude there is an intelligence behind the Universe. I have a basic God concept, but I no long spend a lot of time contemplating God. I try to focus, instead, on the practical ways a deists and live a reasoned life.

Anyway, glad you made it here!

Hi Dave,

It is great to hear from you. Yes I miss Chuck as well but I do love the yearly Facebook message as a reminder. Thanks for sharing with me how your journey is going and I hope your family are well!

[spiritseeker]

I finally found my copy of Deist. So That's What I Am!. I wanted to see what you had written for that publication back in 2009. In your article, The Journey of Spiritseeker, you said that you were beginning to dabble in the Progressive Christianity movement. Wikipedia describes PC as a "post-liberal movement within Christianity". And you mentioned that "it allows for Christian Mysticism". So I was wondering if it was the mystical aspect that attracted you to PC, or simply the absence of regressive dogma. You admitted that "my head was still having Deist thoughts, and my heart was still longing for a more personal relationship with God".

I have always been a seeker but have never felt that I fit anywhere. I have always believed in a Creator and deep down I have always longed for a personal relationship with God and a community of like minded people. Over the last year I have tried an Anglican church off and on. The people have been great but I have felt like a fraud as I have not felt the personal relationship and I am still figuring out what my thoughts are on Jesus. That is an ongoing study at the moment.

I feel that I have more questions than answers and I feel like I am heading down a path of accepting this and now I just want to learn about the history of humans and learn about Jesus with a historical lens. I realise that subconsciously I have always been hampered by Christianity and the Bible even though I have studied it thoroughly. Recently I have become more open minded and I just want to be a student of the world and learn about things I have taken for granted. I want to learn about the history of miracles, ghosts and the paranormal plus the history of humanity.

Wiki also says that PC was "rooted in Enlightenment thinking", which was also the soil of the Deist movement. So, I can see why the rationalism & humanism of Deism appealed to you. However, you also indicated a belief in Jesus' teaching, and a need for inter-personal fellowship, both of which are not found in the current state of freethinking cyberspace Deism. [Note : like deist Thomas Jefferson, I can accept the progressive ideas of Jesus without swallowing the supernatural Christ-myth.]

Classical Deism was basically a reaction to the repressive Faith & Dogma of the Catholic Church, but otherwise it was similar to liberal Protestant thinking, in that at first, it retained belief in Monotheism, and continued some Christian traditions. However, philosophical Deists envisioned a non-intervening non-personal deity (no prayers, no miracles), and demoted Jesus to non-divine status (no trinity, no salvation).

In accordance with Enlightenment-era Science & Skepticism, Deism relied on ordinary human Reason for all knowledge, and rejected blind Faith in ancient infallible scriptures (no direct revelation). Hence, Deism typically rejected the miracles & mysticism in the Bible. As time went by, Deism became less dependent on the traditions of Christianity, and the teachings of Jesus. Consequently, the Neo-Deism I talk about in the BothAnd blog is almost completely divorced from those historical roots. [Note : Deists also typically reject Gnostic claims about direct non-rational knowledge of supernatural topics. As with Psychics, it's easy to fake such "knowing", because no one can prove you wrong.]

I am fine with this as I want to strip back any preconceptions that I have had and just be as good as I can be in my life. I still struggle with the notion that all psychics are fake but as I said I just want to be as open as possible and experience as much as I can to make my own decisions.

Neo-Deism is nothing more than a general idea at the moment. There is no actual church or even a face-to-face community of believers (in the abstract Creator of an autonomous evolving world). So, in this forum I have been proposing a way to take it to the next level, by mutually developing a "creation Myth", and a "Deist Creed", neither to be taken literally. With those key features, abstract philosophical Deism might begin to appeal to those more interested in concrete religious functions, such as local meetings and social services. As a practical communal religion, Neo-Deism would be essentially the same as Secular Humanism, with none of the supernatural features of traditional religions. Can you handle that? [Note : Neo-D won't provide any divine assurances to assuage existential fears & anxieties, other than the hard-hearted advice to "stop worrying about the next life, and enjoy this one while you can".]

At this point in time I can definitely handle that. I am an open book who is happy to see where this takes us. On a human level I think we do strive for a community where we are safe and comfortable and where we can be who we are. I know with Deism this can be tricky as it is an individual and personal journey where we are all unique but I also see the lack of groups as a downfall.

For all practical purposes, the G*D of Neo-Deism is equivalent to capricious implacable Nature, because we have no knowledge of anything outside the natural world. That is, unless you accept the inspiration of scripture writers, or the mystical-ways-of-knowing claimed by Gnostics & Psychics. Only for philosophical purposes -- such as justification for ideal principles of physics and morality -- would the notion of a reality-creating super-natural deity apply. If we assume that the Creator designed our world according to He/r own non-human purposes, with no devil-god to spoil paradise, then what-is-is-what-ought-to-be. [Note : "create", "design",and "purpose" are metaphors for concepts beyond our understanding]

Therefore, Neo-D won't be much consolation to those who expect answered prayers, a guaranteed afterlife, or a way to communicate with the dearly departed. Those beliefs are not supported by empirical evidence, so as emotional-need-fillers they must be accepted on faith in questionable anecdotes, by those who are predisposed toward a mystical-magical side to mundane reality. For non-mystics, their Maslow needs must be met in ordinary ways by ordinary humans, with no divine dispensation of love from above. [Note : as I envision it, Neo-D is essentially Atheism with a reasonable explanation for the existence of Reality]

Neo-Deism though, as I envision it, is essentially a return to the "Enlightenment Values" that gave birth to the original Deist movement. It is also a rejection of the extreme liberal/leftist worldview of the "Postmodern Movement". Both of those topics are discussed in the blog. So, what do you think? Is Neo-Deism too far removed from Western & Eastern religious traditions to serve your human needs, and to satisfy your longing for spiritual connection? [Note : Neo-D is a spartan religion, so a philosophical boot-camp may be necessary to toughen-up those who depend on a mother-god for existential emotional support.]

A lot of what is written here is pretty full on for me at the moment and I don't have much to contribute except to say that ultimate we don't have the answers to everything and I am ok with that. I think there is a place for Neo-Deism and I would love to see this evolve into a community of people who can share their own unique experiences where we can all learn and grow in a non threatening environment.

Idealistically I would love to see a website (with the ability of group chats),an active facebook group. I know this has fallen over in the past with sites like Positive Deism, Unified Deism and others but there is definitely a place for it! I don't know if any of my comments are relevant at all but I thank you for the opportunity for my own reflection which is helpful in its own way!

[Gnomon]

SS

If you want to break one of my long replies into smaller statements, just use the "quote" marks in the tool boxes at the top right of each post. Then you can copy and paste from the long reply, and respond only to specific items, as I'm doing here.

First I copy a line, and paste it in the reply, then select the "quote" symbol in the tool boxes above. That will add the "quote" code to the beginning and end of the pasted line. After extracting the lines you want, you can delete the long quote.

I have always been a seeker but have never felt that I fit anywhere. I have always believed in a Creator and deep down I have always longed for a personal relationship with God and a community of like minded people.

I too am a lifelong seeker, but more in a philosophical sense than religious. I am an extreme introvert and think more than feel, or do. So, I never strongly felt the need for a personal relationship with God. Instead, I simply need to know whether there is some kind of ultimate entity that would explain why the world is as it is -- what I call G*D. Even after I left the fundamentalist church of my youth, I couldn't shake the notion that there must be something god-like.

Although I subscribe to the current concept of material evolution, I still think the Big Bang beginning required a First Cause to light the fuse. Scientific cosmologies, such as Many Worlds, and Multiverses, just don't explain the existence of immaterial Qualia (Life, Love, Feelings) in the material world.

I feel that I have more questions than answers and I feel like I am heading down a path of accepting this and now I just want to learn about the history of humans and learn about Jesus with a historical lens.

Having more questions than answers is the job description of a philosopher. Most religious authorities believe they have all the answers they need, in the Bible. But when you ask them philosophical questions, they tend to change the subject.

My current understanding of the historical Jesus, is that he was one of many first century "messiahs", who attracted a following, and then was executed. But then some disciples -- who were discouraged & depressed when their military messiah died -- began to create a novel Christ myth to explain why the OT prophesies didn't work out as the Jews expected. In their myths, such as the mystical book of Revelations, they combined some old Jewish mysticism with Greek & Roman & Egyptian mysticism, to create a new kind of ghostly messiah. Not a physical king to kick out the Romans, but a spiritual avatar to renew faith in a universal God.

I can go into much deeper detail, and cite sources, if you are interested in a non-biblical view of Jesus.

I am fine with this as I want to strip back any preconceptions that I have had and just be as good as I can be in my life. I still struggle with the notion that all psychics are fake but as I said I just want to be as open as possible and experience as much as I can to make my own decisions.

Most people are easy targets for con-men & psychics because of their preconceptions and assumptions. To see how this works, you should learn how stage magicians manage to make the audience see what they expect to see, instead of what the magician is actually doing. This information is available online and in books.

I know with Deism this can be tricky as it is an individual and personal journey where we are all unique but I also see the lack of groups as a downfall.

That is why I have asserted on the Positive Deism forum that Deism -- with it's abstract do-nothing deity* -- doesn't have the "right stuff" to become an actual religion for non-philosophers. Early Deism appealed to educated intellectuals of a progressive/liberal inclination, but not to the yearning masses.

Now the 21st century world, more than ever, needs an alternative to the polarized religious & political institutions that divide the world into black & white us-versus-them categories. So in the BothAnd forum, I propose that a disparate group of Deists collaborate to create a Deist religion from scratch. That's the point of the Neo-Deism thread. Other successful religions, such as Mormonism, have been created by ordinary humans, but instead of creating ex nihilo, they borrowed the basic structure of older religions, and merely added a few new twists.

The primary problem with a tradition-breaking custom-made religion, though, is that it carries no divine authority, and instead relies on a sort of "social contract" to act as-if we all believe the same thing. But, as an non-social introvert, I don't have the "right stuff" to pull-off such a revolutionary mass-movement. So, until a charismatic Deist leader comes along to inspire us with "I have a dream" rhetoric, I'll be content to sit alone at my computer communing with a few other seekers in cyberspace.

Idealistically I would love to see a website (with the ability of group chats), an active facebook group.

Apparently there is a Deist forum on Facebook, but I wouldn't know for sure, because I've never ventured into the Facebook world. It goes against all my introvert inclinations.

This nerdy blog & forum is not likely to ever find a large audience; so for now, Facebook seems to be the only place for such an interactive Deist chat room to emerge. If it's not already available, why don't you start one?


* PS__My concept of G*D is a do-everything deity, but with a completely different purpose & method for creation than the Yahweh of the Old Testament. G*D is defined in the blog Glossary.