What is the Definition of Deism?

Many confuse Theism/Atheism/Pantheism and Deism. I’ve even seen deists contradict their own definition of God’s intervention in their world (i.e. miracles & personal relationship with God) . This article will define Deism to clarify how it differs from Theism and other “ism’s”:

Let’s start with these definitions:

• deist – a person who believes that God created the universe and then abandoned it *1
• deist – of or relating to deism *1
• deism – the form of theological rationalism that believes in God on the basis of reason without reference to revelation *2
• Concept of God during the scientific revolution; the role of divinity was limited to setting natural laws in motion. *3
• Deism is a category of belief in god (Spirit, Deity, ground of being, Dao, etc…) based on reason, experience, and the observation of nature. *4
• A movement or system of thought advocating natural religion, emphasizing morality, and in the 18th century denying the interference of the Creator with the laws of the universe *5

In the simplest terms, Deism is the belief in a God that created the universe and thenabandoned it. Deists understand God through: one’s own reasoning, logic, the study of nature and one’s accumulated experiences. Deism does not accept that any holy book or scriptures is the word of God. Deists do not accept revelation or miracles. Deists do not believe that God intervenes or interferes with anything in the Universe.

The analogy often used to explain Deism is that of a clock maker (god) who constructs a [perfect?] watch (world/universe) and then leaves it, allowing it to operate on its own.

Deism was popular during the Enlightenment period.

FAQ: Compare Deism with Atheism, Agnosticism, Theism & Pantheism:

• Deism: is a Rational based category of belief in god (that created the universe and then abandoned it). Deists come to their conclusions using their own reasoning, thus their conclusions are different.
• Strong Atheism: is a Rational based category of belief that asserts that God (or any supreme being) does nott exist.
• Agnosticism: is a Rational based category of belief that asserts a lack of knowledge about god thus Agnostics are not sure.
• Pantheism: is a Rational based category of belief in god (where God and the Universe are identical). This website (Pantheism Today) has many articles on Pantheism that will give you a better understanding of what Pantheism exactly is .
• Theism: In a specific sense is a Traditional and scriptural based category of belief in God, (read more on Theism here)

FAQ: Is Deism a religion or a philosophy?

Some Deists believe that it is a religion, and some say it is just a philosophy. It is up to individual Deists to decide whether it is a religion or philosophy *6

Sources:

1. wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
2. wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn
3. https://nisd.schoolnet.com/Outreach/Content/ServeAttachment.aspx
4. http://panendeism.org
5. home.att.net/~tangents/data/rlgdef.htm
6. http://deist.info/deism-frequently-asked-questions.html

Comments copied from the old website:

1. 1
   K. Mapson Says:
   December 31st, 2009 at 4:33 pm   edit
   And what about pandeism? It actually seems weird to me that a website on pantheism would even mention deism without expanding on pandeism.
2. 
   2
   Ethan Z. Says:
   December 31st, 2009 at 11:50 pm   edit
   @ K. Mapson, it’s great to read your comment. Thanks for letting me hear from you. This article was published just a few hours before you found it and left this comment.
   I am in the process of writing about PanDiesm, PanenDeism, and many more “isms”. I am writing as fast as I can considering the holiday season 
   Once the definition is published in an article it will also be listed in the Lexiconhttp://www.pantheismtoday.com/lexicon
   Thanks again
3. 
   3
   K. Mapson Says:
   January 2nd, 2010 at 9:36 pm   edit
   Thanks, it is great to be heard — I’ll look forward to reading the whole of the thing when you’re done!!
4. 
   4
   Ethan Z. Says:
   January 2nd, 2010 at 10:49 pm   edit
   @ K. Mapson
   You are very welcome.
   I added the definition of panDeism and panenDeism to the Lexiconhttp://www.pantheismtoday.com/lexicon
   Here’s what the lexicon has, as of now:
   PanDeism: Pandeism is a kind of Pantheism which incorporates a form of Deism, holding that the Universe is identical to God, but also that God was previously a conscious and sentient force or entity that designed and created the Universe. God only became an unconscious and nonsentient God by becoming the Universe. Other than this distinction (and the possibility that the Universe will one day return to the state of being God), Pandeist philosophy is identical to Pantheism.
   (derived from Greek ‘pan’ = ‘all’ and Latin deus = God, in the sense of deism), is a term describing religious beliefs coherently incorporating or mixing elements of pantheism (that God is identical to the Universe) and deism (that the creator-god who designed the Universe no longer exists in a status where he can be reached, and can instead be confirmed only by reason). It is therefore most particularly “the belief that God precedes the Universe and is the Universe’s creator, [and] that the Universe is currently the entirety of God”, with some adding the contention that “the Universe will one day coalesce back into a single being, God”. It is through this incorporation pandeism claims to answer primary objections to deism (why would God create and then abandon the Universe?) and to pantheism (how did the Universe originate and what is its purpose?).
   PanenDeism: combines deism with panentheism, the belief that the universe is part of God, but not all of God. A central component of Panendeism is “Experiential Metaphysics” – the idea that a mystical component exists within the framework of Panendeism, allowing the seeker to experience a relationship to Deity through meditation, prayer or some other type of communion. This is a major departure from Classical Deism. Belief in a God who is both panentheistic and deistic, e.g. a God who contains all of the universe, but who nevertheless transcends or has some existence separate from the universe, but also who does not actively intervene in the universe and can only be determined from reason.
   FYI. A lot of this info is from wikipedia.
   I have tens of articles that will be coming down the pike, I intend to discuss pandiesm and panendeism in more detail and compare them to pantheism and panentheism.
   Thanks!
5. 
   5
   Bill Baker Says:
   January 18th, 2010 at 2:17 pm   edit
   Deism does’nt require ‘creation” per-se{it can involve emanationism, or simply that there is an intelligence of sorts, a calculating creative force inherent within the natural universe- but an impersonal one}. A type of deism called ‘PanDeism” or “PanenDeism”.
   Look these philosophies up.
   It’s a view I also hold{as an anti-theistic Agnostic-Deist who tends towatds PanDeism/PanenDeism}. It’s what a growing segment of deists are starting to adopt, and it the view{whether knowingly or unintentionally} many physicists and cosmologists believe in{from Einstein, to Davies, Hawking, and others.} It is often pre-fixed by a degree of Agnoticism as well, and perhaps an anti-theistic view about theism and revealed religions.
   Deism has evolved since the 18th century, It has many strains of thought and a few sub-cateogories in todays new deistic movement.
   Scientific pantheism by the way is an oxymoron. theism by defnition as distinct from deism, requires a belief in a ‘personal” and interventional{often, though not always ‘revealed”} god or gods. Pantheism therefore must include more spiritualist ideas of the universe as god but also personal and parent like{like those types who spew the ‘god is love” baloney}. Deisms god is a non-personal one.
   Einstein, for example, denied there could be a personal god, but he denied atheismk and theism as well. he did once call hiself agnostuc{and atheist in the eyes of a jesuit priest; but then deists and buddhists and muslims and anyone is an atheist in the eyes of a priest}.
   Scientific Pantheism is just superflous silliness, “sexed up atheism’ is just atheism, they should just simply say they are atheists therefore. For that reason AND because they are taking the word away from actual real Pantheists and giving the publci a false impression of what Pantheism actually is.
   In Reason:
   Bill Baker
6. 
   6
   Ethan Z Says:
   February 22nd, 2010 at 4:45 am   edit
   @ Bill Baker,
   Thank you for your comment.
   Would you agree that PanenDeism combines both Pantheism and Deism (that it is almost the same as pantheism)?
   Can you say with eternal & infinite certainty that the Universe (Omniverse/Divine) does not have [or literally is] consciousness, or that it does not give humans pure joy or love when they feel a connection to this Universe?
7. 
   7
   K. Mapson Says:
   June 12th, 2010 at 4:33 pm   edit
   Ugh, filthy spammer…. someone delete this crap post above.
   To Ethan, as to your last set of questions: Pandeism and Panendeism (or PanDeism and PanenDeism, if you prefer) both combine aspects of Pantheism and Deism. Panendeism is less purely pantheistic as it involves some part of “God” existing separate from and independent from our Universe. Pandeism has all of God, instead of part of God, becoming our Universe. Could the Universe have consciousness? I recall Carl Sagan having intoned that we are a way for the Universe to know itself…. and as to love and joy, do we need our Universe to “give” us these? Might we not just “take” those from it?
8. 
   8
   Ethan Z Says:
   June 13th, 2010 at 5:38 am   edit
   @ K. Mapson
   Thank you.
   I deleted that spam, once in a while a few get through my spam blocking efforts 
   I agree with your definition.. to your question, that is a very good question. I wonder if love and joy are purely human or if they are “universal” shared amongst animals, plants, planets, bacteria, “aliens”, etc??
9. 
   9
   Rhenqui Says:
   July 1st, 2010 at 8:41 am   edit
   Wow, very interesting coversation here. Very good point on Carl Sagan, a perpetual favorite!
10. 
    10
    Rhenqui Says:
    July 1st, 2010 at 8:43 am   edit
    I observe many animals to show what is unmistakably love and joy, among dogs especially.
11. 
    11
    Rhenqui Says:
    July 1st, 2010 at 8:57 am   edit
    And dolphins!
12. 
    12
    WisdomeisMine Says:
    September 8th, 2010 at 11:05 pm   edit
    Great post, this is the quality I like to see.This is something I’ll be submitting to Reddit. thanks for sharing this.
13. 
    13
    Ethan Z Says:
    December 16th, 2010 at 9:36 am   edit
    @Rhenqui – I agree. Also cats, I know for a fact. When observing cats and dogs it seems a lot of their decisions are emotion-based. I am very careful to not project my human beliefs, bias, emotions while observing the animals but can’t help but see emotions in them especially fear and longing. In cats and dogs, that is.