5 Responses to Help, please

1. John says:

   February 2, 2006 at 6:16 am

   Perhaps you should consider calling a reference desk at a major public library and ask the librarian to look it up in a dictionary of theology.

   That’s what I do.

   Reply
2. Mark says:

   February 2, 2006 at 7:29 am

   Here’s my quick take. A theist would be someone that believes in God; the opposite of an atheist. That covers a broad piece of turf, including Christians, Jews, Muslims, et al.

   A deist would be someone that believes in an impersonal, hands-off creator God; the term gets most typically used for Founding-Father-era folks like Jefferson.

   You’ll see that today in some secular-leaning folks who can’t quite buy into atheism but don’t want the personal God of the Bible; “Thanks for the Big Bang; we’ll take it from here.”

   Deists are theists, but theists can be just about anything except atheists.

   Reply
3. Rena says:

   February 9, 2006 at 12:30 pm

   From wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deist):

   The words deism and theism are closely related and this sometimes leads to controversy. The root of the word “deism” is from the Latin deus, while the root of the word theism comes from the Greek theos, both meaning god in English. However, theism can include faith or revelation as a basis for belief, while deism includes only belief which can be substantiated through reason.

   Reply
4. Steve Heyduck says:

   February 10, 2006 at 9:43 am

   Thanks for the input. I find it interesting that, in general, western Christians accept “theism” as a friendly term, while usually using “deism” as a somewhat hostile term.

   Both “theism” and “deism” are creations of the Enlightenment world which first provided the space for a generic god to be construed.

   Hence, in my book, both terms are either equally acceptable, or, more likely, equally useless.

   Reply
5. Richard H says:

   February 10, 2006 at 10:06 am

   It’s also useful to consider the rhetorical context. Originally Deism/Theism was developed as an alternative to full-blooded doctrinal Christianity – in the direction of a Least Common Denominator. As this Deism/Theism evolved into what we know as Deism – and later into a-theism – a new position arose, defined not (usually) against full-blooded doctrinal Christianity but against Deism/Atheism. In the context of a culture that said, “No God” (or is it, “No, God”?), Theists sought to show rational reasons for adhering to belief in god. As good moderns, they were frequently foundationalists, so it was easy to think that the first thing to do – the foundation – was to prove the rationality of “god.” Just as in the begining, this needed to be done on minimalist terms so as to reach the arguments and objections of the Deists/Atheists.

   Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Enter your comment here...

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Email (required) (Address never made public)

Name (required)

Website

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s

Notify me of new comments via email.

Notify me of new posts via email.

Δ