Introduction To Deism

Deism (/ˈdiː.ɪzəm/[1][2] or /ˈdeɪ.ɪzəm/, derived from the Latin word deus meaning "god") combines the rejection of revelation and authority as a source of religious knowledge with the conclusion that reason and observation of the natural world are sufficient to determine the existence of a single creator of the universe.[3][4][5][6][7]

Deism holds that God does not intervene with the functioning of the natural world but rather allows it to function according to the laws of nature.

Deism gained prominence among intellectuals during the Age of Enlightenment—especially in Britain, France, Germany and the United States—who, raised as Christians, believed inone god but became disenchanted with organized religion and notions such as the Trinity,Biblical inerrancy and the supernatural interpretation of events such as miracles.[8] Included in those influenced by its ideas were leaders of the American and French Revolutions.[9]

Today, deism is considered to exist in two principal forms: classical and modern.[10]

Contents
[hide]
 * 1 Overview
 * 2 Features of deism
 * 2.1 Concepts of "reason"
 * 2.2 Arguments for the existence of God
 * 2.3 History of religion and the deist mission
 * 2.4 Freedom and necessity
 * 2.5 Beliefs about immortality of the soul
 * 2.6 Deist terminology
 * 3 History of classical deism
 * 3.1 Historical background of the emergence of deism
 * 3.1.1 Discovery of diversity
 * 3.1.2 Religious conflict in Europe
 * 3.1.3 Advances in scientific knowledge
 * 3.2 Precursors of deism
 * 3.3 Deism in Britain
 * 3.3.1 John Locke
 * 3.3.2 Flowering of classical deism, 1690–1740
 * 3.3.3 Matthew Tindal
 * 3.3.4 David Hume
 * 3.4 Deism in Continental Europe
 * 3.5 Deism in the United States
 * 3.6 Decline of deism
 * 4 Deism today
 * 4.1 Modern deistic organizations and websites
 * 4.2 Subcategories of contemporary deism
 * 4.2.1 Pandeism
 * 4.2.2 Panendeism
 * 4.3 Contemporary deist opinions on prayer
 * 4.4 Recent discussion of the role of deism
 * 5 See also
 * 6 References
 * 7 Bibliography
 * 7.1 Histories
 * 7.2 Primary sources

Overview[edit]
See also: Theism

Deism is a theological position concerning the relationship between "the Creator" and the natural world. Deistic viewpoints emerged during the scientific revolution of 17th-century Europe and came to exert a powerful influence during the eighteenth century enlightenment. Deism stood between the narrow dogmatism of the period and skepticism. Though deists rejected atheism,[11] they often were called "atheists" by more traditional theists.[12] There were a number of different forms in the 17th and 18th century. In England, deism included a range of people from anti-Christian to un-Christian theists.[13]

For Deists, human beings can only know God via reason and the observation of nature, but not by revelation or supernatural manifestations (such as miracles) – phenomena which Deists regard with caution if not skepticism. See the section Features of deism, following. Deism is related to naturalism because it credits the formation of life and the universe to a higher power, using only natural processes. Deism may also include a spiritual element, involving experiences of God and nature.[14]

The words deism and theism are both derived from words for god: the former from Latin deus, the latter from Greek theós (θεός).

Perhaps the first use of the term deist is in Pierre Viret's Instruction Chrétienne en la doctrine de la foi et de l'Évangile (Christian teaching on the doctrine of faith and the Gospel, 1564), reprinted in Bayle's Dictionnaire entry Viret. Viret, a Calvinist, regarded deism as a new form of Italian heresy.[16] Viret wrote (as translated from the original French):

In England, the term deist first appeared in Robert Burton's The Anatomy of Melancholy (1621).[9]

Lord Herbert of Cherbury (1583–1648) is generally considered the "father of English Deism", and his book De Veritate (1624) the first major statement of deism. Deism flourished in England between 1690 and 1740, at which time Matthew Tindal's Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730), also called "The Deist's Bible", gained much attention. Later deism spread to France, notably through the work ofVoltaire, to Germany, and to the United States.

Features of deism[edit]
The concept of deism covers a wide variety of positions on a wide variety of religious issues. Sir Leslie Stephen's English Thought in the Eighteenth Century describes three features[17] constituting the core of deism: Constructional elements of deist thought included: Specific thoughts on aspects of the afterlife will vary. While there are those who maintain that God will punish or reward us according to our behavior on Earth, likewise there are those who assert that any punishment or reward that is due to us is given during our mortal stay on Earth.
 * Rejection of religions based on books that claim to contain the revealed word of God.
 * Rejection of religious dogma and demagogy.
 * Skepticism of reports of miracles, prophecies and religious "mysteries".
 * God exists and created the universe.
 * God gave humans the ability to reason.

Individual deists varied in the set of critical and constructive elements for which they argued. Some deists rejected miracles and prophecies but still considered themselves Christians because they believed in what they felt to be the pure, original form of Christianity – that is, Christianity as it existed before it was corrupted by additions of such superstitions as miracles, prophecies, and the doctrine of the Trinity. Some deists rejected the claim of Jesus' divinity but continued to hold him in high regard as a moral teacher (see, for example,Thomas Jefferson's famous Jefferson Bible and Matthew Tindal's Christianity as Old as the Creation). Other, more radical deists rejected Christianity altogether and expressed hostility toward Christianity, which they regarded as pure superstition. In return, Christian writers often charged radical deists with atheism.

Note that the terms constructive and critical are used to refer to aspects of deistic thought, not sects or subtypes of deism – it would be incorrect to classify any particular deist author as "a constructive deist" or "a critical deist". As Peter Gay notes:

It should be noted, however, that the constructive element of deism was not unique to deism. It was the same as the natural theology that was so prevalent in all English theology in the 17th and 18th centuries. What set deists apart from their more orthodox contemporaries were their critical concerns.

One of the remarkable features of deism is that the critical elements did not overpower the constructive elements. As E. Graham Waring observed,[18] "A strange feature of the [Deist] controversy is the apparent acceptance of all parties of the conviction of the existence of God." And Basil Willey observed:[19]

Concepts of "reason"[edit]
According to the deists, our reason gives us all the information we need:

Consequently, the deists attempted to use reason as a critical tool for exposing and rejecting what they saw as nonsense:

Arguments for the existence of God[edit]
Some deists used the cosmological argument for the existence of God - as did Thomas Hobbes at several places in his writings:

History of religion and the deist mission[edit]
Most deists saw the religions of their day as corruptions of an original, pure religion that was simple and rational. They felt that this original pure religion had become corrupted by "priests" who had manipulated it for personal gain and for the class interests of the priesthood in general.

According to this world view, over time "priests" had succeeded in encrusting the original simple, rational religion with all kinds of superstitions and "mysteries" – irrational theological doctrines. Laymen were told by the priests that only the priests really knew what was necessary for salvation and that laymen must accept the "mysteries" on faith and on the priests' authority. This kept the laity baffled by the nonsensical "mysteries", confused, and dependent on the priests for information about the requirements for salvation. The priests consequently enjoyed a position of considerable power over the laity, which they strove to maintain and increase. Deists referred to this kind of manipulation of religious doctrine as "priestcraft", a highly derogatory term.[citation needed]

Deists saw their mission as the stripping away of "priestcraft" and "mysteries" from religion, thereby restoring religion to its original, true condition – simple and rational. In many cases, they considered true, original Christianity to be the same as this original natural religion. As Matthew Tindal put it:

One implication of this deist creation myth was that primitive societies, or societies that existed in the distant past, should have religious beliefs that are less encrusted with superstitions and closer to those of natural theology. This became a point of attack for thinkers such as David Hume as they studied the "natural history of religion".

Freedom and necessity[edit]
Enlightenment thinkers, under the influence of Newtonian science, tended to view the universe as a vast machine, created and set in motion by a creator being, that continues to operate according to natural law, without any divine intervention. This view naturally led to what was then usually called necessitarianism[23] (the modern term is determinism): the view that everything in the universe – including human behavior – is completely causally determined by antecedent circumstances and natural law. (See, for example, La Mettrie'sL'Homme machine.) As a consequence, debates about freedom versus "necessity" were a regular feature of Enlightenment religious and philosophical discussions.

Because of their high regard for natural law and for the idea of a universe without miracles, deists were especially susceptible to the temptations of determinism. Reflecting the intellectual climate of the time, there were differences among deists about freedom and determinism. Some, such as Anthony Collins, actually were necessitarians.[24]

Beliefs about immortality of the soul[edit]
Deists hold a variety of beliefs about the soul. Some, such as Lord Herbert of Cherbury and William Wollaston,[25] held that souls exist, survive death, and in the afterlife are rewarded or punished by God for their behavior in life. Some, such as Benjamin Franklin, believed in reincarnation or resurrection. Others, such as Thomas Paine, had definitive beliefs about the immortality of the soul:

Still others such as Anthony Collins,[26] Bolingbroke, Thomas Chubb, and Peter Annet were materialists and either denied or doubted the immortality of the soul.[27]

Deist terminology[edit]
Deist authors – and 17th- and 18th-century theologians in general – referred to God using a variety of vivid circumlocutions such as:
 * Supreme Being
 * Divine Watchmaker
 * Grand Architect of the Universe
 * Nature's God. Used in the United States Declaration of Independence
 * Father of Lights. Benjamin Franklin used this terminology when proposing that meetings of the Constitutional Convention begin with prayers[28]

Historical background of the emergence of deism[edit]
Deistic thinking has existed since ancient times. Among the Ancient Greeks, Heraclitus conceived of a logos, a supreme rational principle, and said the wisdom "by which all things are steered through all things" was "both willing and unwilling to be called Zeus (God)". Platoenvisaged God as a Demiurge or 'craftsman'. Outside ancient Greece many other cultures have expressed views that resemble deism in some respects. However, the word "deism", as it is understood today, is generally used to refer to the movement toward natural theology or freethinking that occurred in 17th-century Europe, and specifically in Britain.

Natural theology is a facet of the revolution in world view that occurred in Europe in the 17th century. To understand the background to that revolution is also to understand the background of deism. Several cultural movements of the time contributed to the movement.[29]

Discovery of diversity[edit]
The humanist tradition of the Renaissance included a revival of interest in Europe's classical past in ancient Greece and Rome. The veneration of that classical past, particularly pre-Christian Rome, the new availability of Greek philosophical works, the successes of humanism and natural science along with the fragmentation of the Christian churches and increased understanding of other faiths, all helped erode the image of the church as the unique source of wisdom, destined to dominate the whole world.

In addition, study of classical documents led to the realization that some historical documents are less reliable than others, which led to the beginnings of biblical criticism. In particular, when scholars worked on biblical manuscripts, they began developing the principles of textual criticism and a view of the New Testament being the product of a particular historical period different from their own.

"Life and works of Confucius", byProspero Intorcetta, 1687.

In addition to discovering diversity in the past, Europeans discovered diversity in the present. The voyages of discovery of the 16th and 17th centuries acquainted Europeans with new and different cultures in the Americas, in Asia, and in the Pacific. They discovered a greater amount of cultural diversity than they had ever imagined, and the question arose of how this vast amount of human cultural diversity could be compatible with the biblical account of Noah's descendants. In particular, the ideas of Confucius, translated into European languages by the Jesuits stationed inChina, are thought to have had considerable influence on the deists and other philosophical groups of the Enlightenment who were interested by the integration of the system of morality of Confucius into Christianity.[30][31]

In particular, cultural diversity with respect to religious beliefs could no longer be ignored. As Herbert wrote in De Religione Laici (1645),

Religious conflict in Europe[edit]
Europe had been plagued by sectarian conflicts and religious wars since the beginning of the Reformation. In 1642, when Lord Herbert of Cherbury's De Veritate was published, the Thirty Years War had been raging on continental Europe for nearly 25 years. It was an enormously destructive war that (it is estimated) destroyed 15–20% of the population of Germany. At the same time, the English Civil Warpitting King against Parliament was just beginning.

Such massive violence led to a search for natural religious truths – truths that could be universally accepted, because they had been either "written in the book of Nature" or "engraved on the human mind" by God.

Advances in scientific knowledge[edit]
The 17th century saw a remarkable advance in scientific knowledge, the scientific revolution. The work of Copernicus, Kepler, and Galileoset aside the old notion that the earth was the center of the universe. These discoveries posed a serious challenge to biblical and religious authorities, Galileo's condemnation for heresy being an example. In consequence the Bible came to be seen as authoritative on matters of faith and morals but no longer authoritative (or meant to be) on science.

Isaac Newton's (1642–1727) mathematical explanation of universal gravitation explained the behavior both of objects here on earth and of objects in the heavens in a way that promoted a worldview in which the natural universe is controlled by laws of nature. This, in turn, suggested a theology in which God created the universe, set it in motion controlled by natural law and retired from the scene. The new awareness of the explanatory power of universal natural law also produced a growing skepticism about such religious staples as miracles(violations of natural law) and about religious books that reported them.

Precursors of deism[edit]
Early works of biblical criticism, such as Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan and Spinoza's Theologico-Political Treatise, as well as works by lesser-known authors such as Richard Simon and Isaac La Peyrère, paved the way for the development of critical deism.

Edward Herbert, portrait by Isaac Oliver(1560–1617)

An important precursor to deism was the work of Lord Edward Herbert of Cherbury (d. 1648). He has been called the "father of English deism", and his book De Veritate (On Truth, as It Is Distinguished from Revelation, the Probable, the Possible, and the False) (1624) "the first major statement of deism".[32][33] However, his beliefs in divine intervention, particularly in response to prayer, are at odds with the basic ideas of deism. In Herbert's account of one incident, he prayed "I am not satisfied enough whether I shall publish this Book, De Veritate; if it be for Thy glory, I beseech Thee give me some Sign from Heaven, if not, I shall suppress it" and recounts that the response was "a loud tho' yet gentle Noise came from the Heavens (for it was like nothing on Earth)... I had the Sign I demanded".[34]

Like his contemporary Descartes, Herbert searched for the foundations of knowledge. In fact, the first two thirds of De Veritate are devoted to an exposition of Herbert's theory of knowledge. Herbert distinguished truths obtained through experience, and through reasoning about experience, from innate truths and from revealed truths. Innate truths are imprinted on our minds, and the evidence that they are so imprinted is that they are universally accepted. Herbert's term for universally accepted truths was notitiae communes – common notions.

In the realm of religion, Herbert believed that there were five common notions.[11]

The following lengthy quote from Herbert can give the flavor of his writing and demonstrate the sense of the importance that Herbert attributed to innate Common Notions, which can help in understanding the effect of Locke's attack on innate ideas on Herbert's philosophy:

According to Gay, Herbert had relatively few followers, and it was not until the 1680s that Herbert found a true successor in Charles Blount (1654–1693). Blount made one special contribution to the deist debate: "by utilizing his wide classical learning, Blount demonstrated how to use pagan writers, and pagan ideas, against Christianity. ... Other Deists were to follow his lead."[35]

John Locke[edit]
The publication of John Locke's An Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1689, but dated 1690) marks a major turning point in the history of deism. Since Herbert's De Veritate, innate ideas had been the foundation of deist epistemology. Locke's famous attack on innate ideas in the first book of the Essay effectively destroyed that foundation and replaced it with a theory of knowledge based on experience. Innatist deism was replaced by empiricist deism. Locke himself was not a deist. He believed in both miracles and revelation, and he regarded miracles as the main proof of revelation.[36]

After Locke, constructive deism could no longer appeal to innate ideas for justification of its basic tenets such as the existence of God. Instead, under the influence of Locke and Newton, deists turned to natural theology and to arguments based on experience and Nature: the cosmological argument and the argument from design.

Flowering of classical deism, 1690–1740[edit]
Peter Gay places the zenith of deism "from the end of the 1690s, when the vehement response to John Toland's Christianity Not Mysterious (1696) started the deist debate, to the end of the 1740s when the tepid response to Conyers Middleton's Free Inquiry signalled its close."[37]

During this period, prominent British deists included William Wollastson, Charles Blount, and Henry St John, First Viscount Bolingbroke.

The influential author Anthony Ashley-Cooper, Third Earl of Shaftesbury is also usually categorized as a deist. Although did not think of himself as a deist, he shared so many attitudes with deists that Gay calls him "a Deist in fact, if not in name".[38]

Notable late-classical deists include Peter Annet (1693–1769), Thomas Chubb (1679–1747), Thomas Morgan (?–1743), and Conyers Middleton (1683–1750).

Matthew Tindal[edit]
Especially noteworthy is Matthew Tindal's Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730), which "became, very soon after its publication, the focal center of the deist controversy. Because almost every argument, quotation, and issue raised for decades can be found here, the work is often termed 'the deist's Bible'."[39] Following Locke's successful attack on innate ideas, Tindal's "Deist Bible" redefined the foundation of deist epistemology as knowledge based on experience or human reason. This effectively widened the gap between traditional Christians and what he called "Christian Deists", since this new foundation required that "revealed" truth be validated through human reason.

David Hume[edit]
David Hume

The writings of David Hume are sometimes credited with causing or contributing to the decline of deism. English deism, however, was already in decline before Hume's works on religion (1757,1779) were published.[40]

Furthermore, some writers maintain that Hume's writings on religion were not very influential at the time that they were published.[41]

Nevertheless, modern scholars find it interesting to study the implications of his thoughts for deism. In the Natural History of Religion (1757), Hume contends that polytheism, not monotheism, was "the first and most ancient religion of mankind". In addition, contends Hume, the psychological basis of religion is not reason, but fear of the unknown.
 * Hume's skepticism about miracles makes him a natural ally of deism.
 * His skepticism about the validity of natural religion cuts equally against deism and deism's opponents, who were also deeply involved in natural theology. But his famous Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion were not published until 1779, by which time deism had almost vanished in England.

As E. Graham Waring saw it;[18]

Experts dispute whether Hume was a deist, an atheist, or something else. Hume himself was uncomfortable with the terms deist andatheist, and Hume scholar Paul Russell has argued that the best and safest term for Hume's views is irreligion.[42]

Deism in Continental Europe[edit]
Voltaire at age 24 by Nicolas de Largillière

English deism, in the words of Peter Gay, "travelled well. ... As Deism waned in England, it waxed in France and the German states."[43]

France had its own tradition of religious skepticism and natural theology in the works ofMontaigne, Bayle, and Montesquieu. The most famous of the French deists was Voltaire, who acquired a taste for Newtonian science, and reinforcement of deistic inclinations, during a two-year visit to England starting in 1726.

French deists also included Maximilien Robespierre and Rousseau. For a short period of time during the French Revolution the Cult of the Supreme Being was the state religion of France.

Kant's identification with deism is controversial. An argument in favor of Kant as deist is Alan Wood's "Kant's Deism," in P. Rossi and M. Wreen (eds.), Kant's Philosophy of Religion Re-examined (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1991); an argument against Kant as deist is Stephen Palmquist's "Kant's Theistic Solution".

Deism in the United States[edit]
Thomas Paine

In the United States, Enlightenment philosophy (which itself was heavily inspired by deist ideals) played a major role in creating the principle of religious freedom, expressed in Thomas Jefferson's letters and included in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. American Founding Fathers, or Framers of the Constitution, who were especially noted for being influenced by such philosophy include Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, and Hugh Williamson. Their political speeches show distinct deistic influence.

Other notable Founding Fathers may have been more directly deist. These include James Madison, possibly Alexander Hamilton, Ethan Allen,[44] and Thomas Paine (who published The Age of Reason, a treatise that helped to popularize deism throughout the United States and Europe).

Unlike the many deist tracts aimed at an educated elite, Paine's treatise explicitly appealed to ordinary people, using direct language familiar to the laboring classes. How widespread deism was among ordinary people in the United States is a matter of continued debate.[45]

A major contributor was Elihu Palmer (1764–1806), who wrote the "Bible" of American deism in his Principles of Nature (1801) and attempted to organize deism by forming the "Deistical Society of New York" and other deistic societies from Maine to Georgia.[46]

In the United States there is controversy over whether the Founding Fathers were Christians, deists, or something in between.[47][48]Particularly heated is the debate over the beliefs of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington.[49][50][51]

Benjamin Franklin wrote in his autobiography, "Some books against Deism fell into my hands; they were said to be the substance of sermons preached at Boyle's lectures. It happened that they wrought an effect on me quite contrary to what was intended by them; for the arguments of the Deists, which were quoted to be refuted, appeared to me much stronger than the refutations; in short, I soon became a thorough Deist. My arguments perverted some others, particularly Collins and Ralph; but each of them having afterwards wrong'd me greatly without the least compunction, and recollecting Keith's conduct towards me (who was another freethinker) and my own towards Vernon and Miss Read, which at times gave me great trouble, I began to suspect that this doctrine, tho' it might be true, was not very useful."[52][53] Franklin also wrote that "the Deity sometimes interferes by his particular Providence, and sets aside the Events which would otherwise have been produc'd in the Course of Nature, or by the Free Agency of Man.[54] He later stated, in the Constitutional Convention, that "the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth -- that God governs in the affairs of men."[55]

For his part, Thomas Jefferson is perhaps one of the Founding Fathers with the most outspoken of Deist tendencies, though he is not known to have called himself a deist, generally referring to himself as a Unitarian. In particular, his treatment of the Biblical gospels which he titled The Life and Morals of Jesus of Nazareth, but which subsequently became more commonly known as the Jefferson Bible, exhibits a strong deist tendency of stripping away all supernatural and dogmatic references from the Christ story. However, Frazer, following the lead of Sydney Ahlstrom, characterizes Jefferson as not a Deist but a "theistic rationalist", because Jefferson believed in God's continuing activity in human affairs.[56][57] Frazer cites Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia, where he wrote, "I tremble" at the thought that "God is just," and he warned of eventual "supernatural influence" to abolish the scourge of slavery.[58][59]

Decline of deism[edit]
Deism is generally considered to have declined as an influential school of thought by around 1800.

It is probably more accurate, however, to say that deism evolved into, and contributed to, other religious movements. The term deistbecame rarely used, but deist beliefs, ideas, and influences remained. They can be seen in 19th-century liberal British theology and in the rise of Unitarianism, which adopted many of its beliefs and ideas.

Commentators have suggested a variety of reasons for the decline of classical deism.
 * the rise, growth, and spread of naturalism[60] and materialism, which were atheistic
 * the writings of David Hume[60][61] and Immanuel Kant[61] (and later, Charles Darwin), which increased doubt about the first causeargument and the argument from design, turning many (though not all) potential deists towards atheism instead
 * criticisms (by writers such as Joseph-Marie de Maistre and Edmund Burke) of excesses of the French Revolution, and consequent rising doubts that reason and rationalism could solve all problems[61]
 * deism became associated with pantheism, freethought, and atheism, all of which became associated with one another, and were so criticized by Christian apologists[60][61]
 * frustration with the determinism implicit in "This is the best of all possible worlds"
 * deism remained a personal philosophy and had not yet become an organized movement (before the advent in the 20th century of organizations such as the World Union of Deists)
 * with the rise of Unitarianism, based on deistic principles, people self-identified as Unitarians rather than as deists[61]
 * an anti-deist and anti-reason campaign by some Christian clergymen and theologians such as Johann Georg Hamann to vilify deism
 * Christian revivalist movements, such as Pietism or Methodism, which taught that a more personal relationship with a deity was possible[61]

Deism today[edit]
Contemporary deism attempts to integrate classical deism with modern philosophy and the current state of scientific knowledge. This attempt has produced a wide variety of personal beliefs under the broad classification of belief of "deism". The Modern Deism web site includes one list of the unofficial tenets of modern deism.[62]

Classical deism held that a human's relationship with God was impersonal: God created the world and set it in motion but does not actively intervene in individual human affairs but rather through divine providence. What this means is that God will give humanity such things as reason and compassion but this applies to all and not to individual intervention.

Some modern deists have modified this classical view and believe that humanity's relationship with God is transpersonal, which means that God transcends the personal/impersonal duality and moves beyond such human terms. Also, this means that it makes no sense to state that God intervenes or does not intervene, as that is a human characteristic which God does not contain. Modern deists believe that they must continue what the classical deists started and continue to use modern human knowledge to come to understand God, which in turn is why a human-like God that can lead to numerous contradictions and inconsistencies is no longer believed in and has been replaced with a much more abstract conception.

A modern definition[63] has been created and provided by the World Union of Deists (WUD) that provides a modern understanding of deism:

Because deism asserts God without accepting claims of divine revelation, it appeals to people from both ends of the religious spectrum.Antony Flew, for example, was a convert from atheism, and Raymond Fontaine was a Roman Catholic priest for over 20 years before converting.[64]

The 2001 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS), which involved 50,000 participants, reported that the number of participants in the survey identifying themselves as deists grew at the rate of 717 percent between 1990 and 2001. If this were generalized to the US population as a whole, it would make deism the fastest-growing religious classification in the US for that period, with the reported total of 49,000 self-identified adherents representing about 0.02% of the US population at the time.[65][66]

Modern deistic organizations and websites[edit]
In 1993, Bob Johnson established the first Deist organization since the days of Thomas Paine and Elihu Palmer with the World Union of Deists. The WUD offered the monthly hardcopy publication THINK! Currently the WUD offers two online Deist publications, THINKonline!and Deistic Thought & Action! As well as using the Internet for spreading the Deist message, the WUD is also conducting a direct mail campaign.

1996 saw the first Web site dedicated to deism with the WUD site Deism.com. In 1998, Sullivan-County.com[67] was originally the Virginia/Tennessee affiliate of WUD and the second deism site on the Web. It split from Deism.com to promote more traditional and historical Deist beliefs and history.

The Positive Deism movement began in 2004. As has been stated above, historically and to the present day, Deists have been very critical of the revealed religions as well as trying to be constructive. Positive Deists focus their efforts solely on being constructive and avoid criticism of other faiths. In 2009 Chuck Clendenen, one of its adherents, published a book entitled "Deist: So that's what I am!". The aim of the book was to educate those who believed similarly, but did not know the words Deism and Deist, that there is a name for their belief.

In 2009, the World Union of Deists published a book on deism, Deism: A Revolution in Religion, A Revolution in You written by its founder and director, Bob Johnson. This book focuses on what deism has to offer both individuals and society.

In 2010, the Church of Deism was formed in an effort to extend the legal rights and privileges of more traditional religions to Deists while maintaining an absence of established dogma and ritual.

Subcategories of contemporary deism[edit]
Modern deists hold a wide range of views on the nature of God and God's relationship to the world. The common area of agreement is the desire to use reason, experience, and nature as the basis of belief.

There are a number of subcategories of modern deism, including monodeism (this being the default standard concept of deism),polydeism, pandeism, panendeism, spiritual deism, process deism, Christian deism, scientific deism, and humanistic deism. Some deists see design in nature and purpose in the universe and in their lives (Prime Designer). Others see God and the universe in a co-creative process (Prime Motivator). Some deists view God in classical terms and see God as observing humanity but not directly intervening in our lives (Prime Observer), while others see God as a subtle and persuasive spirit who created the world, but then stepped back to observe (Prime Mover).

Pandeism[edit]
Main article: Pandeism

Pandeism combines elements of deism with elements of pantheism, the belief that the universe is identical to God. Pandeism holds that God was a conscious and sentient force or entity that designed and created the universe, which operates by mechanisms set forth in the creation. God thus became an unconscious and nonresponsive being by becoming the universe. Other than this distinction (and the possibility that the universe will one day return to the state of being God), pandeistic beliefs are deistic. The earliest allusion to pandeism found to date is in 1787, in translator Gottfried Große’s interpretation of Pliny the Elder’s Natural History:

Here Gottfried says that Pliny is not Spinozist, but 'could be called a Pandeist' whose Nature or God 'is not a being separate from the world. Its nature is the whole creation in concrete form, and thus it seems to be designed with its divinity.' The term was used in 1859 byGerman philosophers and frequent collaborators Moritz Lazarus and Heymann Steinthal in Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft. They wrote:

This is translated as:

In the 1960s, theologian Charles Hartshorne scrupulously examined and rejected both deism and pandeism (as well as pantheism) in favor of a conception of God whose characteristics included "absolute perfection in some respects, relative perfection in all others" or "AR", writing that this theory "is able consistently to embrace all that is positive in either deism or pandeism", concluding that "panentheistic doctrine contains all of deism and pandeism except their arbitrary negations".[70]

Panendeism[edit]
Panendeism combines deism with panentheism, the belief that the universe is part of God, but not all of God. A 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.[71] This is a major departure from classical deism.

A 1995 news article includes an early usage of the term by Jim Garvin, a Vietnam veteran who became a Trappist monk in the Holy Cross Abbey of Berryville, Virginia, and went on to lead the economic development of Phoenix, Arizona. Despite his Roman Catholic post, Garvin described his spiritual position as "pandeism' or 'pan-en-deism,' something very close to the Native American concept of the all-pervading Great Spirit..."[72]

Contemporary deist opinions on prayer[edit]
Many classical deists were critical of some types of prayer. For example, in Christianity as Old as the Creation, Matthew Tindal argues against praying for miracles, but advocates prayer as both a human duty and a human need.[73]

Today, deists hold a variety of opinions about prayer:
 * Some contemporary deists believe (with the classical deists) that God has created the universe perfectly, so no amount of supplication, request, or begging can change the fundamental nature of the universe.
 * Some deists believe that God is not an entity that can be contacted by human beings through petitions for relief; rather, God can only be experienced through the nature of the universe.
 * Some deists do not believe in divine intervention, but still find value in prayer as a form of meditation, self-cleansing, and spiritual renewal. Such prayers are often appreciative (that is, "Thank you for ...") rather than supplicative (that is, "Please, God, grant me ...").[74]
 * Some deists practice meditation and make frequent use of Affirmative Prayer, a non-supplicative form of prayer which is common in the New Thought movement.[citation needed]

Recent discussion of the role of deism[edit]
Charles Taylor, in his 2007 book A Secular Age, showed the historical role of deism, leading to what he calls an exclusive humanism. This humanism invokes a moral order, whose ontic commitment is wholly intra-human, with no reference to transcendence.[75] One of the special achievements of such deism-based humanism is that it discloses new, anthropocentric moral sources by which human beings are motivated and empowered to accomplish acts of mutual benefit.[76] This is the province of a buffered, disengaged self, which is the locus of dignity, freedom and discipline, and is endowed with a sense of human capability.[77] According to Taylor, by the early 19th century this deism-mediated exclusive humanism developed as an alternative to Christian faith in a personal God and an order of miracles and mystery.

See also[edit]

 * Agnosticism
 * American Enlightenment
 * Avatars
 * Ceremonial deism
 * Christian deism
 * Deities
 * Ietsism
 * Infinitism
 * List of deists
 * Polydeism
 * Religious affiliations of Presidents of the United States
 * George Washington and religion
 * Spiritual entities
 * Theistic evolution
 * Transcendentalism
 * Unitarian Universalism

References[edit]

 * 1) Jump up^  US dict:  dē′·ĭzm. R. E. Allen (ed) (1990). The Concise Oxford Dictionary. Oxford University Press.
 * 2) Jump up^ "Deist – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary". Merriam-webster.com. 2012. Retrieved 2012-10-10.
 * 3) Jump up^ "Deism". Encyclopedia Britannica. 2012.  In general, Deism refers to what can be called natural religion, the acceptance of a certain body of religious knowledge that is inborn in every person or that can be acquired by the use of reason and the rejection of religious knowledge when it is acquired through either revelation or the teaching of any church.
 * 4) Jump up^ "Deism". Jewish Encyclopedia. 1906. Retrieved 2012-10-10. DEISM: A system of belief which posits God's existence as the cause of all things, and admits His perfection, but rejects Divine revelation and government, proclaiming the all-sufficiency of natural laws.
 * 5) Jump up^ Aveling, Francis, ed. (1908). "Deism". The Catholic Encyclopedia. Retrieved 2012-10-10.  The deists were what nowadays would be called freethinkers, a name, indeed, by which they were not infrequently known; and they can only be classed together wholly in the main attitude that they adopted, viz. in agreeing to cast off the trammels of authoritative religious teaching in favour of a free and purely rationalistic speculation.... Deism, in its every manifestation was opposed to the current and traditional teaching of revealed religion.
 * 6) Jump up^ "Webster's 1828 Dictionary". 1828. Retrieved 2012-10-10.  The doctrine or creed of a deist; the belief or system of religious opinions of those who acknowledge the existence of one God, but deny revelation: or deism is the belief in natural religion only, or those truths, in doctrine and practice, which man is to discover by the light of reason, independent and exclusive of any revelation from God. Hence deism implies infidelity or a disbelief in the divine origin of the scriptures.
 * 7) Jump up^ "Deism". The Encyclopedia of Christian Civilization. 2011.doi:10.1002/9780470670606.wbecc0408/abstract.  Deism is a rationalistic, critical approach to theism with an emphasis on natural theology. The Deists attempted to reduce religion to what they regarded as its most foundational, rationally justifiable elements. Deism is not, strictly speaking, the teaching that God wound up the world like a watch and let it run on its own, though that teaching was embraced by some within the movement.
 * 8) Jump up^ Thomsett, Michael C. (2011). Heresy in the Roman Catholic Church: A History. McFarland. p. 222. ISBN 978-0-7864-8539-0. Retrieved 2013-05-16.
 * 9) ^ Jump up to:a b Wilson, Ellen Judy; Reill, Peter Hanns (2004). Deism. Infobase Publishing. pp. 146–148. ISBN 978-0-8160-5335-3. Retrieved 2013-05-16.
 * 10) Jump up^ Hardwick, J. "Modern Deism". J. Hardwick. Retrieved 2010.
 * 11) ^ Jump up to:a b Justo L. González (1984). The Reformation to the present day. HarperCollins. p. 190. ISBN 978-0-06-063316-5. Retrieved2010-08-14.
 * 12) Jump up^ Joseph C. McLelland; Canadian Corporation for Studies in Religion (November 1988). Prometheus rebound: the irony of atheism. Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press. p. 85. ISBN 978-0-88920-974-9. Retrieved 2010-08-14.
 * 13) Jump up^ James E. Force; Richard Henry Popkin (1990). Essays on the context, nature, and influence of Isaac Newton's theology. Springer. p. 43. ISBN 978-0-7923-0583-5. Retrieved 2010-08-14.
 * 14) Jump up^ "Deism Defined". Moderndeism.com. Retrieved 2012-09-25.
 * 15) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. p. 13.
 * 16) ^ Jump up to:a b See the entry for "Deism" in the on-line Dictionary of the History of Ideas.
 * 17) Jump up^ Kors, Alan Charles (1998). The Birth of the Modern Mind: The Intellectual History of the 17th and 18th Centuries. Chantilly, Virginia: The Great Courses. p. 52.
 * 18) ^ Jump up to:a b Waring, E. Graham (1967). Deism and Natural Religion: A Source Book. Introduction, p. xv.
 * 19) Jump up^ Willey, Basil (1940). The Eighteenth Century Background. p. 11.
 * 20) Jump up^ Waring, E. Graham (1967). Deism and Natural Religion: A Source Book. p. 113.
 * 21) Jump up^ Quoted in Deism and Natural Religion: A Source Book, pp. 1–12
 * 22) Jump up^ Waring, Edward Graham (1967). Deism and natural religion: a source book. F. Ungar Pub. Co. p. 163. Retrieved 2013-05-16.
 * 23) Jump up^ David Hartley, for example, described himself as "quite in the necessitarian scheme. See Ferg, Stephen, "Two Early Works of David Hartley", Journal of the History of Philosophy, vol. 19, no. 2 (April 1981), pp. 173–89.
 * 24) Jump up^ See for example Liberty and Necessity (1729).
 * 25) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. p. 137.
 * 26) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. p. 134.
 * 27) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. p. 78.
 * 28) Jump up^ Michael E. Eidenmuller. "Benjamin Franklin – Constitutional Convention Address on Prayer". Americanrhetoric.com. Retrieved2010-09-27.
 * 29) Jump up^ The discussion of the background of deism is based on the excellent summary in "The Challenge of the Seventeenth Century" in The Historical Jesus Question by Gregory W. Dawes (Westminster: John Knox Press, 2001). Good discussions of individual deist writers can be found in The Seventeenth Century Background and The Eighteenth Century Background by Basil Willey.
 * 30) Jump up^ "Windows into China", John Parker, p.25, ISBN 0-89073-050-4
 * 31) Jump up^ "The Eastern origins of Western civilization", John Hobson, p194-195, ISBN 0-521-54724-5
 * 32) Jump up^ Willey, Basil (1934). The Seventeenth Century Background.
 * 33) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. pp. 59 ff.
 * 34) Jump up^ Herbert, The Life of Edward Lord Herbert of Cherbury (Dublin, 1771), 244–245, as cited in Waligore p. 189.
 * 35) Jump up^ Gay, Peter (1968). Deism: An Anthology. Van Nostrand. pp. 47–48.
 * 36) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. pp. 96–99.
 * 37) ^ Jump up to:a b Gay, Peter (1968). Deism: An Anthology. Van Nostrand. pp. 9–10.
 * 38) Jump up^ Gay, Peter (1968). Deism: An Anthology. Van Nostrand. pp. 78–79.
 * 39) Jump up^ Waring, Edward Graham (1967). Deism and natural religion: a source book. F. Ungar Pub. Co. p. 107. Retrieved 2013-05-16.
 * 40) ^ Jump up to:a b Gay, Peter (1968). Deism: An Anthology. Van Nostrand. p. 140.
 * 41) Jump up^ Orr, John (1934). English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits. Eerdmans. p. 173.
 * 42) Jump up^ Russell, Paul (2005). "Hume on Religion". Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 2009-12-17.
 * 43) Jump up^ Gay, Peter (1968). Deism: An Anthology. Van Nostrand. p. 143.
 * 44) Jump up^ "Excerpts from Allen's Reason The Only Oracle Of Man". Ethan Allen Homestead Museum.
 * 45) Jump up^ "Culture Wars in the Early Republic". Common-place.
 * 46) Jump up^ Walters, Kerry S. (1992). Rational Infidels: The American Deists.Durango, CO: Longwood Academic. ISBN 0-89341-641-X.
 * 47) Jump up^ "The Deist Minimum". First Things. 2005.
 * 48) Jump up^ Holmes, David (2006). The Faiths of the Founding Fathers. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, USA. ISBN 0-19-530092-0.
 * 49) Jump up^ David Liss (11 June 2006). "The Founding Fathers Solving modern problems, building wealth and finding God". Washington Post.
 * 50) Jump up^ Gene Garman (2001). "Was Thomas Jefferson a Deist?". Sullivan-County.com.
 * 51) Jump up^ Walter Isaacson (March–April 2004). "Benjamin Franklin: An American Life". Skeptical Inquirer.
 * 52) Jump up^ Franklin, Benjamin (2005). Benjamin Franklin: Autobiography, Poor Richard, and Later Writings. New York, NY: Library of America. p. 619. ISBN 1-883011-53-1.
 * 53) Jump up^ "Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography". University of Maine, Farmington.
 * 54) Jump up^ Benjamin Franklin, On the Providence of God in the Government of the World (1730).
 * 55) Jump up^ Max Farrand, ed. (1911). The Records of the Federal Convention of 1787 1. New Haven: Yale University Press. p. 451.
 * 56) Jump up^ Frazer, Gregg L. (2012). The Religious Beliefs of America's Founders: Reason, Revelation, Revolution. University Press of Kansas. p. 11.
 * 57) Jump up^ Ahlstrom, Sydney E. (2004). A Religious History of the American People. p. 359.
 * 58) Jump up^ Frazer, Religious Beliefs of America's Founders, p. 128 quoting Jefferson's Notes on the State of Virginia, 1800 ed., p. 164.
 * 59) Jump up^ Other scholars call Jefferson a "theistic rationalist" (although that term was coined later), such as Gary Scott Smith (2006). Faith and the Presidency: From George Washington to George W. Bush. Oxford U.P. p. 69. ISBN 9780198041153.
 * 60) ^ Jump up to:a b c "English Deism". The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 2006. Retrieved 2009-12-16.
 * 61) ^ Jump up to:a b c d e f Mossner, Ernest Campbell (1967). "Deism".Encyclopedia of Philosophy 2. Collier-MacMillan. pp. 326–336.
 * 62) Jump up^ http://www.moderndeism.com/html/deism_defined.html
 * 63) Jump up^ "Deism Defined".
 * 64) Jump up^ "Raymond Fontaine's website: From Catholic Priest to Deist With Nature's God". deism.com.
 * 65) Jump up^ "ARIS key findings, 2001".
 * 66) Jump up^ "Largest Religious Groups in the United States of America". Adherents.com.
 * 67) Jump up^ "Deism and Reason". Sullivan-county.com. Retrieved2010-09-27.
 * 68) Jump up^ Große, Gottfried (1787). Naturgeschichte: mit erläuternden Anmerkungen. p. 165.
 * 69) Jump up^ Moritz Lazarus and Heymann Steinthal, Zeitschrift für Völkerpsychologie und Sprachwissenschaft (1859), p. 262.
 * 70) Jump up^ Hartshorne, Charles (1964). Man's Vision of God and the Logic of Theism. p. 348. ISBN 0-208-00498-X.
 * 71) Jump up^ "Welcome to". Panendeism.com. Retrieved 2010-09-27.
 * 72) Jump up^ Albuquerque Journal, Saturday, November 11, 1995, B-10.
 * 73) Jump up^ External link to portion of text
 * 74) Jump up^ "Deism Defined, Welcome to Deism, Deist Glossary and Frequently Asked Questions". Deism.com. 2009-06-25. Retrieved2010-09-27.
 * 75) Jump up^ Taylor, C (2007). A Secular Age. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. p. 256.
 * 76) Jump up^ Taylor, C (2007). A Secular Age. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. p. 257.
 * 77) Jump up^ Taylor, C (2007). A Secular Age. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press. p. 262.

Histories[edit]

 * An Age of Infidels: The Politics of Religious Controversy in the Early United States by Eric R. Schlereth (University of Pennsylvania Press; 2013) 295 pages; on conflicts between deists and their opponents.
 * Herrick, James A. (1997). The Radical Rhetoric of the English Deists: The Discourse of Skepticism, 1680–1750. University of South Carolina Press.
 * English Deism: Its Roots and Its Fruits by John Orr (1934)
 * European Thought in the Eighteenth Century by Paul Hazard (1946, English translation 1954)
 * Early Deism in France: From the so-called 'deistes' of Lyon (1564) to Voltaire's 'Lettres philosophiques' (1734) by C. J. Betts (Martinus Nijhoff, 1984)
 * The Seventeenth Century Background: Studies on the Thought of the Age in Relation to Poetry and Religion by Basil Willey (1934)
 * The Eighteenth Century Background: Studies on the Idea of Nature in the Thought of the Period by Basil Willey (1940)
 * Simon Tyssot de Patot and the Seventeenth-Century Background of Critical Deism by David Rice McKee (Johns Hopkins Press, 1941)
 * The Historical Argument for the Resurrection of Jesus During the Deist Controversy by William Lane Craig (Edwin Mellen, 1985)
 * Deism, Masonry, and the Enlightenment. Essays Honoring Alfred Owen Aldridge. Ed. J. A. Leo Lemay. Newark, University of Delaware Press, 1987.

Primary sources[edit]

 * Paine, Thomas (1795). The Age of Reason.
 * Palmer, Elihu. The Principles of Nature.
 * Deism: A Revolution in Religion, A Revolution in You.
 * Deism: An Anthology by Peter Gay (Van Nostrand, 1968)
 * Deism and Natural Religion: A Source Book by E. Graham Waring (Frederick Ungar, 1967)
 * The American Deists: Voices of Reason & Dissent in the Early Republic by Kerry S. Walters (University of Kansas Press, 1992), which includes an extensive bibliographic essay