Hubbry Logo
DeismDeismMain
Open search
Deism
Community hub
Deism
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Deism
Deism
Deism
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Deism
Origins
Movements
Notable figures
False equivalencies
Opposition
Part of a series on
Theism
Types of faith
Specific conceptions
In particular religions
Abrahamic
Indo-Iranian
Chinese
Attributes
  • Experiences
  • Practices
Related topics

Deism (/ˈdiːɪzəm/ DEE-iz-əm [1][2] or /ˈdeɪ.ɪzəm/ DAY-iz-əm; derived from the Latin term deus, meaning "god")[3][4] is the philosophical position and rationalistic theology[5] that generally rejects revelation as a source of divine knowledge and asserts that empirical reason and observation of the natural world are exclusively logical, reliable, and sufficient to determine the existence of a Supreme Being as the creator of the universe.[11] More simply stated, Deism is the belief in the existence of God—often, but not necessarily, an impersonal and incomprehensible God who does not intervene in the universe after creating it,[8][12] solely based on rational thought without any reliance on revealed religions or religious authority.[13] Deism emphasizes the concept of natural theology—that is, God's existence is revealed through nature.[14]

Since the 17th century and during the Age of Enlightenment, especially in 18th-century England, France, and North America,[15] various Western philosophers and theologians formulated a critical rejection of the several religious texts belonging to the many organized religions, and began to appeal only to truths that they felt could be established by reason as the exclusive source of divine knowledge.[17] Such philosophers and theologians were called "Deists", and the philosophical/theological position they advocated is called "Deism".[18]

Deism as a distinct philosophical and intellectual movement declined toward the end of the 18th century[5] but had a revival in the early 19th century.[19] Some of its tenets continued as part of other intellectual and spiritual movements, like Unitarianism,[4] and Deism continues to have advocates today,[3] including with modern variants such as Christian deism and pandeism.

Early developments

[edit]

Ancient history

[edit]
Main article: History of philosophy

Deistical thinking has existed since ancient times; the roots of Deism can be traced back to the philosophical tradition of Ancient Greece.[20] The 3rd-century Christian theologian and philosopher Clement of Alexandria explicitly mentioned persons who believed that God was not involved in human affairs, and therefore led what he considered a licentious life.[21] However, Deism did not develop as a religio-philosophical movement until after the Scientific Revolution, which began in the mid-16th century in early modern Europe.[22]

Divinity schools in Islamic theology

[edit]
Main articles: Aqidah and God in Islam

In the history of Islam, one of the earliest systematic schools of Islamic theology to develop was the Muʿtazila in the mid-8th century CE.[23][24] Muʿtazilite theologians emphasized the use of reason and rational thought, positing that the injunctions of God are accessible through rational thought and inquiry, and affirmed that the Quran was created (makhlūq) rather than co-eternal with God, an affirmation that would develop into one of the most contentious questions in the history of Islamic theology.[23][24]

In the 9th–10th century CE, the Ashʿarī school developed as a response to the Muʿtazila, founded by the 10th-century Muslim scholar and theologian Abū al-Ḥasan al-Ashʿarī.[25] Ashʿarītes still taught the use of reason in understanding the Quran, but denied the possibility to deduce moral truths by reasoning.[25] This position was opposed by the Māturīdī school;[26] according to its founder, the 10th-century Muslim scholar and theologian Abū Manṣūr al-Māturīdī, human reason is supposed to acknowledge the existence of a creator deity (bāriʾ) solely based on rational thought and independently from divine revelation.[26] He shared this conviction with his teacher and predecessor Abū Ḥanīfa al-Nuʿmān (8th century CE), whereas al-Ashʿarī never held such a view.[26]

According to the Afghan-American philosopher Sayed Hassan Hussaini, the early schools of Islamic theology and theological beliefs among classical Muslim philosophers are characterized by "a rich color of Deism with a slight disposition toward theism".[27]

Origins of Deism

[edit]

The terms deism and theism are both derived from words meaning "god": the Latin term deus and the Ancient Greek term theós (θεός), respectively.[3] The word déiste first appeared in French in 1563 in a theological treatise written by the Swiss Calvinist theologian named Pierre Viret,[9] but Deism was generally unknown in the Kingdom of France until the 1690s when Pierre Bayle published his famous Dictionnaire Historique et Critique, which contained an article on Viret.[28]

In English, the words deist and theist were originally synonymous, but by the 17th century the terms started to diverge in meaning.[29] The term deist with its current meaning first appears in English in Robert Burton's The Anatomy of Melancholy (1621).

Herbert of Cherbury and early English Deism

[edit]
Lord Herbert of Cherbury, portrayed by Isaac Oliver, c. 1603–05

The first major statement of Deism in English literature is Lord Herbert of Cherbury's book De Veritate (1624).[30] Lord Herbert, like his contemporary Descartes, searched for the foundations of knowledge. The first two-thirds of his book De Veritate (On Truth, as It Is Distinguished from Revelation, the Probable, the Possible, and the False) are devoted to an exposition of Herbert's theory of knowledge. Herbert distinguished truths from experience and distinguished reasoning about experience from innate and revealed truths. Innate truths are imprinted on our minds, as evidenced by their universal acceptance. Herbert referred to universally accepted truths as notitiae communes—Common Notions. Herbert believed there were five Common Notions that unify all religious beliefs.

  1. There is one Supreme God.
  2. God ought to be worshipped.
  3. Virtue and piety are the main parts of divine worship.
  4. We ought to be remorseful for our sins and repent.
  5. Divine goodness dispenses rewards and punishments, both in this life and after it.

Herbert himself had relatively few followers, and it was not until the 1680s that Herbert found a true successor in Charles Blount (1654 – 1693).[31]

The peak of Deism (1696–1801)

[edit]
See also: Deism in England and France in the 18th century

The appearance of John Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690) marks an important turning-point and new phase in the history of English Deism. Lord Herbert's epistemology was based on the idea of "common notions" (or innate ideas). Locke's Essay was an attack on the foundation of innate ideas. After Locke, deists could no longer appeal to innate ideas as Herbert had done. Instead, deists were forced to turn to arguments based on experience and nature. Under the influence of Newton, they turned to the argument from design as the principal argument for the existence of God.[32]

Peter Gay identifies John Toland's Christianity Not Mysterious (1696), and the "vehement response" it provoked, as the beginning of post-Lockian Deism. Among the notable figures, Gay describes Toland and Matthew Tindal as the best known; however, Gay considered them to be talented publicists rather than philosophers or scholars. He regards Conyers Middleton and Anthony Collins as contributing more to the substance of debate, in contrast with fringe writers such as Thomas Chubb and Thomas Woolston.[33]

Other English Deists prominent during the period include William Wollaston, Charles Blount, Henry St John, 1st Viscount Bolingbroke,[7] and, in the latter part, Peter Annet, Thomas Chubb, and Thomas Morgan. Anthony Ashley-Cooper, 3rd Earl of Shaftesbury was also influential; though not presenting himself as a Deist, he shared many of the deists' key attitudes and is now usually regarded as a Deist.[34]

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".[35] Following Locke's successful attack on innate ideas, Tindal's "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.

Enlightenment Deism

[edit]

Aspects of Deism in Enlightenment philosophy

[edit]

Enlightenment Deism consisted of two philosophical assertions: (1) reason, along with features of the natural world, is a valid source of religious knowledge, and (2) revelation is not a valid source of religious knowledge. Different Deist philosophers expanded on these two assertions to create what Leslie Stephen later termed the "constructive" and "critical" aspects of Deism.[36][37] "Constructive" assertions—assertions that deist writers felt were justified by appeals to reason and features of the natural world (or perhaps were intuitively obvious or common notions)—included:[38][39]

  • God exists and created the universe.
  • God gave humans the ability to reason.

"Critical" assertions—assertions that followed from the denial of revelation as a valid source of religious knowledge—were much more numerous, and included:

  • Rejection of all books (including the Quran and the Bible) that claimed to contain divine revelation.[40]
  • Rejection of the incomprehensible notion of the Trinity and other religious "mysteries".
  • Rejection of reports of miracles, prophecies, etc.

The origins of religion

[edit]

A central premise of Deism was that the organized religions of their day were corruptions of an original religion that was pure, natural, simple, and rational. Humanity lost this original religion when it was subsequently corrupted by priests who manipulated it for personal gain and for the class interests of the priesthood,[41] and encrusted it with superstitions and "mysteries"—irrational theological doctrines. Deists referred to this manipulation of religious doctrine as "priestcraft", a derogatory term.[42] For Deists, this corruption of natural religion was designed to keep laypeople baffled by "mysteries" and dependent on the priesthood for information about the requirements for salvation. This gave the priesthood a great deal of power, which the Deists believed the priesthood worked to maintain and increase. Deists saw it as their mission to strip away "priestcraft" and "mysteries". Matthew Tindal, perhaps the most prominent Deist writer in early modern Europe, claimed that this was the proper, original role of the Christian Church.[43]

One implication of this premise was that current-day primitive societies, or societies that existed in the distant past, should have religious beliefs less infused with superstitions and closer to those of natural theology. This position became less and less plausible as Enlightenment philosophers such as David Hume began studying the natural history of religion and suggested that the origin of religion was not in reason but in emotions, such as the fear of the unknown.

Immortality of the soul

[edit]

Different Deists had different beliefs about the immortality of the soul, about the existence of Hell and damnation to punish the wicked, and the existence of Heaven to reward the virtuous. Anthony Collins,[44] Bolingbroke, Thomas Chubb, and Peter Annet were materialists and either denied or doubted the immortality of the soul.[45] Benjamin Franklin believed in reincarnation or resurrection. Lord Herbert of Cherbury and William Wollaston[46] held that souls exist, survive death, and in the afterlife are rewarded or punished by God for their behavior in life. Thomas Paine believed in the "probability" of the immortality of the soul.[47]

Miracles and divine providence

[edit]

The most natural position for Deists was to reject all forms of supernaturalism, including the miracle stories in the Bible. The problem was that the rejection of miracles also seemed to entail the rejection of divine providence (that is, God taking a hand in human affairs), something that many Deists were inclined to accept.[48] Those who believed in a watch-maker God rejected the possibility of miracles and divine providence. They believed that God, after establishing natural laws and setting the cosmos in motion, stepped away. He did not need to keep tinkering with his creation, and the suggestion that he did was insulting.[49] Others, however, firmly believed in divine providence, and so, were reluctantly forced to accept at least the possibility of miracles. God was, after all, all-powerful and could do whatever he wanted including temporarily suspending his own natural laws.

Freedom and necessity

[edit]

Enlightenment philosophers 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 called "necessitarianism"[50] (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's L'Homme machine.) As a consequence, debates about freedom versus "necessity" were a regular feature of Enlightenment religious and philosophical discussions. Reflecting the intellectual climate of the time, there were differences among Deists about freedom and determinism. Some, such as Anthony Collins, were actually necessitarians.[51]

David Hume

[edit]
David Hume

Views differ on whether David Hume was a Deist, an atheist, or something else.[52] Like the Deists, Hume rejected revelation, and his famous essay On Miracles provided a powerful argument against belief in miracles. On the other hand, he did not believe that an appeal to Reason could provide any justification for religion. In the essay Natural History of Religion (1757), he contended that polytheism, not monotheism, was "the first and most ancient religion of mankind" and that the psychological basis of religion is not reason, but fear of the unknown.[53] In Waring's words:

The clear reasonableness of natural religion disappeared before a semi-historical look at what can be known about uncivilized man— "a barbarous, necessitous animal," as Hume termed him. Natural religion, if by that term one means the actual religious beliefs and practices of uncivilized peoples, was seen to be a fabric of superstitions. Primitive man was no unspoiled philosopher, clearly seeing the truth of one God. And the history of religion was not, as the deists had implied, retrograde; the widespread phenomenon of superstition was caused less by priestly malice than by man's unreason as he confronted his experience.[54]

Deism in the United States

[edit]
Thomas Paine

The Thirteen Colonies of North America – which became the United States of America after the American Revolution in 1776 – were part of the British Empire, and Americans, as British subjects, were influenced by and participated in the intellectual life of the Kingdom of Great Britain. English Deism was an important influence on the thinking of Thomas Jefferson and the principles of religious freedom asserted in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Other Founding Fathers who were influenced to various degrees by Deism were Ethan Allen,[55] Benjamin Franklin, Cornelius Harnett, Gouverneur Morris, Hugh Williamson, James Madison, and possibly Alexander Hamilton.

In the United States, there is a great deal of controversy over whether the Founding Fathers were Christians, Deists, or something in between.[56][57] Particularly heated is the debate over the beliefs of Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and George Washington.[58][59][60]

In his Autobiography, Franklin wrote that as a young man "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."[61][62] Like some other Deists, Franklin believed 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,"[63] and at the Constitutional Convention stated that "the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth—that God governs in the affairs of men."[64]

Thomas Jefferson is perhaps the Founding Father who most clearly exhibits Deistic tendencies, although he generally referred to himself as a Unitarian rather than a Deist. His excerpts of the canonical gospels (now commonly known as the Jefferson Bible) strip all supernatural and dogmatic references from the narrative on Jesus' life. Like Franklin, Jefferson believed in God's continuing activity in human affairs.[65]

Thomas Paine is especially noteworthy both for his contributions to the cause of the American Revolution and for his writings in defense of Deism, alongside the criticism of Abrahamic religions.[19][66][67][68] In The Age of Reason (1793–1794) and other writings, he advocated Deism, promoted reason and freethought, and argued against institutionalized religions in general and the Christian doctrine in particular.[19][66][67][68] The Age of Reason was short, readable, and probably the only Deistic treatise that continues to be read and influential today.[69] Historian Mitch Horowitz noted that, "Colonials, at least those of means, had the capacity to participate in a fraternal order that enshrined and protected the individual spiritual search—and believed that the search belonged to no single congregation, doctrine, or dogma."[70]

The last contributor to American Deism was Elihu Palmer (1764–1806), who wrote the "Bible of American Deism", Principles of Nature, in 1801. Palmer is noteworthy for attempting to bring some organization to Deism by founding the "Deistical Society of New York" and other Deistic societies from Maine to Georgia.[71]

Deism in France and continental Europe

[edit]
Portrait of Voltaire in the Palace of Versailles, 1724-1725

France had its own tradition of religious skepticism and natural theology in the works of Montaigne, Pierre Bayle, and Montesquieu. The most famous of the French Deists was Voltaire, who was exposed to Newtonian science and English Deism during his two-year period of exile in England (1726–1728). When he returned to France, he brought both back with him, and exposed the French reading public (i.e., the aristocracy) to them, in a number of books.

French Deists also included Maximilien Robespierre and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. During the French Revolution (1789–1799), the Deistic Cult of the Supreme Being—a direct expression of Robespierre's theological views—was established briefly (just under three months) as the new state religion of France, replacing the deposed Catholic Church and the rival atheistic Cult of Reason.

There were over five hundred French Revolutionaries who were deists. These deists do not fit the stereotype of deists because they believed in miracles and often prayed to God. In fact, over seventy of them thought that God miraculously helped the French Revolution win victories over their enemies. Furthermore, over a hundred French Revolutionary deists also wrote prayers and hymns to God. Citizen Devillere was one of the many French Revolutionary deists who believed God did miracles. Devillere said, "God, who conducts our destiny, deigned to concern himself with our dangers. He commanded the spirit of victory to direct the hand of the faithful French, and in a few hours the aristocrats received the attack which we prepared, the wicked ones were destroyed and liberty was avenged."[72]

Deism in Germany is not well documented. We know from correspondence with Voltaire that Frederick the Great was a Deist. Immanuel Kant's identification with Deism is controversial.[73]

Decline of Enlightenment Deism

[edit]

Peter Gay describes Enlightenment Deism as entering slow decline as a recognizable movement in the 1730s.[74] A number of reasons have been suggested for this decline, including:[75]

  • The increasing influence of naturalism and materialism.
  • The writings of David Hume and Immanuel Kant raising questions about the ability of reason to address metaphysical questions.
  • The violence of the French Revolution.
  • Christian revivalist movements, such as Pietism and Methodism (which emphasized a personal relationship with God), along with the rise of anti-rationalist and counter-Enlightenment philosophies such as that of Johann Georg Hamann.[75]

Although Deism has declined in popularity over time, scholars believe that these ideas still have a lingering influence on modern society.[76] One of the major activities of the Deists, biblical criticism, evolved into its own highly technical discipline. Deist rejection of revealed religion evolved into, and contributed to, 19th-century liberal British theology and the rise of Unitarianism.[75]

Contemporary Deism

[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."

There are a number of subcategories of modern Deism, including monodeism (the default, standard concept of deism), pandeism, panendeism, spiritual deism, process deism, Christian deism, polydeism, scientific deism, and humanistic deism.[77][78][79] Some deists see design in nature and purpose in the universe and in their lives. Others see God and the universe in a co-creative process. Some deists view God in classical terms as observing humanity but not directly intervening in our lives, while others see God as a subtle and persuasive spirit who created the world, and then stepped back to observe.

Recent philosophical discussions of Deism

[edit]

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."[80]

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.[81] 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.[82] 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.[83] 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. Some critics of Deism have accused adherents of facilitating the rise of nihilism.[84]

Deism in Nazi Germany

[edit]
Main articles: Gottgläubig, Ideology of the Nazi Party, and Religion in Nazi Germany
Further information: Kirchenkampf, Reichskonkordat, and Religious aspects of Nazism
On positive German God-belief (1939)

In Nazi Germany, Gottgläubig (literally: "believing in God")[85][86] was a Nazi religious term for a form of non-denominationalism practised by those German citizens who had officially left Christian churches but professed faith in some higher power or divine creator.[85] Such people were called Gottgläubige ("believers in God"), and the term for the overall movement was Gottgläubigkeit ("belief in God"); the term denotes someone who still believes in a God, although without having any institutional religious affiliation.[85] These National Socialists were not favourable towards religious institutions of their time, nor did they tolerate atheism of any type within their ranks.[86][87] The 1943 Philosophical Dictionary defined Gottgläubig as: "official designation for those who profess a specific kind of piety and morality, without being bound to a church denomination, whilst however also rejecting irreligion and godlessness."[88] The Gottgläubigkeit is considered a form of deism, and was "predominantly based on creationist and deistic views".[89]

In the 1920 National Socialist Programme of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NSDAP), Adolf Hitler first mentioned the phrase "Positive Christianity". The Nazi Party did not wish to tie itself to a particular Christian denomination, but with Christianity in general, and sought freedom of religion for all denominations "so long as they do not endanger its existence or oppose the moral senses of the Germanic race" (point 24). When Hitler and the NSDAP got into power in 1933, they sought to assert state control over the churches, on the one hand through the Reichskonkordat with the Roman Catholic Church, and the forced merger of the German Evangelical Church Confederation into the Protestant Reich Church on the other. This policy seems to have gone relatively well until late 1936, when a "gradual worsening of relations" between the Nazi Party and the churches saw the rise of Kirchenaustritt ("leaving the Church").[85] Although there was no top-down official directive to revoke church membership, some Nazi Party members started doing so voluntarily and put other members under pressure to follow their example.[85] Those who left the churches were designated as Gottgläubige ("believers in God"), a term officially recognised by the Interior Minister Wilhelm Frick on 26 November 1936. He stressed that the term signified political disassociation from the churches, not an act of religious apostasy.[85] The term "dissident", which some church leavers had used up until then, was associated with being "without belief" (glaubenslos), whilst most of them emphasized that they still believed in a God, and thus required a different word.[85]

A census in May 1939, six years into the Nazi era,[90] and after the annexation of the mostly Catholic Federal State of Austria and mostly Catholic German-occupied Czechoslovakia[91] into German-occupied Europe, indicates[92] that 54% of the population considered itself Protestant, 41% considered itself Catholic, 3.5% self-identified as Gottgläubig,[93][94] and 1.5% as "atheist".[93]

Deism in Turkey

[edit]
Main article: Irreligion in Turkey
Further information: Secularism in Turkey
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founding father of the Republic of Turkey, serving as its first president from 1923 until his death in 1938. He undertook sweeping progressive reforms, which modernized Turkey into a secular, industrializing nation.[95][96][97]

An early April 2018 report of the Turkish Ministry of Education, titled The Youth is Sliding towards Deism, observed that an increasing number of pupils in İmam Hatip schools was repudiating Islam in favour of Deism (irreligious belief in a creator god).[105] The report's publication generated large-scale controversy in the Turkish press and society at large, as well as amongst conservative Islamic sects, Muslim clerics, and Islamist parties in Turkey.[106]

The progressive Muslim theologian Mustafa Öztürk noted the Deistic trend among Turkish people a year earlier, arguing that the "very archaic, dogmatic notion of religion" held by the majority of those claiming to represent Islam was causing "the new generations [to become] indifferent, even distant, to the Islamic worldview." Despite a lack of reliable statistical data, numerous anecdotes and independent surveys appear to point in this direction.[107] Although some commentators claim that the secularization of Turkey is merely a result of Western influence or even an alleged "conspiracy", other commentators, even some pro-government ones, have come to the conclusion that "the real reason for the loss of faith in Islam is not the West but Turkey itself".[108]

Deism in the United States

[edit]
Main article: Irreligion in the United States

Though Deism subsided in the United States post-Enlightenment, it never died out entirely. Thomas Edison, for example, was heavily influenced by Thomas Paine's The Age of Reason.[109] Edison defended Paine's "scientific deism", saying, "He has been called an atheist, but atheist he was not. Paine believed in a supreme intelligence, as representing the idea which other men often express by the name of deity."[109] In 1878, Edison joined the Theosophical Society in New Jersey,[110] but according to its founder, Helena Blavatsky, he was not a very active member.[111] In an October 2, 1910, interview in the New York Times Magazine, Edison stated:

Nature is what we know. We do not know the gods of religions. And nature is not kind, or merciful, or loving. If God made me—the fabled God of the three qualities of which I spoke: mercy, kindness, love—He also made the fish I catch and eat. And where do His mercy, kindness, and love for that fish come in? No; nature made us—nature did it all—not the gods of the religions.[112]

Edison was labeled an atheist for those remarks, and although he did not allow himself to be drawn into the controversy publicly, he clarified himself in a private letter:

You have misunderstood the whole article, because you jumped to the conclusion that it denies the existence of God. There is no such denial, what you call God I call Nature, the Supreme intelligence that rules matter. All the article states is that it is doubtful in my opinion if our intelligence or soul or whatever one may call it lives hereafter as an entity or disperses back again from whence it came, scattered amongst the cells of which we are made.[109]

He also stated, "I do not believe in the God of the theologians; but that there is a Supreme Intelligence I do not doubt."[113]

The 2001 American Religious Identification Survey (ARIS) report estimated that between 1990 and 2001 the number of self-identifying Deists grew from 6,000 to 49,000, representing about 0.02% of the U.S. population at the time.[114] The 2008 ARIS survey found, based on their stated beliefs rather than their religious identification, that 70% of Americans believe in a personal God:[i] roughly 12% are atheists or agnostics, and 12% believe in "a deist or paganistic concept of the Divine as a higher power" rather than a personal God.[115]

The term "ceremonial deism" was coined in 1962 and has been used since 1984 by the Supreme Court of the United States to assess exemptions from the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, thought to be expressions of cultural tradition and not earnest invocations of a deity. It has been noted that the term does not describe any school of thought within Deism itself.[116]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Deism

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Deism is a philosophical and theological stance that affirms the existence of a supreme creator who established the universe through rational design but refrains from subsequent intervention, with knowledge of this deity derived exclusively from human reason and empirical examination of the natural order rather than from purported divine revelations or sacred texts. Emerging in seventeenth-century , it traces its foundational articulation to Edward Herbert, 1st Baron Herbert of Cherbury, whose 1624 treatise De Veritate outlined core tenets including the innate recognition of a divine being, the moral imperative of worship, and the pursuit of virtue as discernible through unaided reason. Deism gained prominence during the Enlightenment, influencing thinkers such as and , who critiqued organized religion's dogmatic excesses while advocating a "" aligned with observable laws of and . Its defining characteristics reject miracles, prophecies, and clerical authority in favor of a distant, clockmaker-like deity whose existence is inferred from the universe's intricate mechanisms, though it faced controversies for potentially undermining ethical frameworks dependent on active .

Core Definition and Principles

Fundamental Tenets of Deism

Deism asserts the existence of a supreme, rational who designed and initiated the according to immutable natural laws but refrains from subsequent interference or . This creator, often likened to a divine , established a self-sustaining order observable through reason and from , rendering miracles, prophecies, and divine interventions incompatible with the consistent operation of those laws. Deists maintain that true religion derives solely from innate human faculties of reason, rejecting organized doctrines, scriptures, and clerical authority as superfluous or corrupt distortions of . The foundational tenets of Deism were systematized by Edward Herbert, 1st Baron of Cherbury, in his 1624 work De Veritate, positing five "common notions" accessible to all rational minds: the existence of a single supreme deity; the duty to worship this being primarily through virtuous conduct and ; the necessity of for failings; and the prospect of rewards for and punishments for vice in an . These principles emphasize accountability grounded in reason rather than or , with worship manifesting as ethical living over ceremonial practices. Enlightenment deists like Thomas Paine and Voltaire reinforced these tenets by prioritizing empirical science and philosophical inquiry, dismissing biblical narratives as mythological and arguing that the universe's harmonious design suffices as proof of divine intelligence without need for supernatural endorsements. Paine, in The Age of Reason (1794), contended that revelation claims undermine reason, insisting instead on a "religion of nature" where God's attributes are discerned from creation's order, not prophetic texts. Similarly, deists universally repudiate miracles as violations of natural uniformity, viewing such accounts as human inventions lacking evidentiary support from observation or logic. This rejection extends to organized religion's institutions, which deists critiqued for fostering superstition and power imbalances contrary to rational piety.

Distinctions from Theism, Atheism, and Pantheism

Deism differs from primarily in its rejection of divine intervention, , and , positing instead a supreme being who created the through rational design but remains uninvolved thereafter, akin to a who winds the mechanism and lets it run without further adjustment. , by contrast, affirms a personal who actively participates in creation, responds to prayers, and reveals truths through scriptures or prophets, as seen in Abrahamic traditions where sustains and governs the continuously. This distinction arises from deism's emphasis on empirical reason and —deriving 's existence from observable order in nature, such as the fine-tuning of physical laws—while dismissing claims unverifiable by reason, which theists accept on or authority. In opposition to atheism, deism upholds the existence of a transcendent creator inferred from rational arguments like the cosmological necessity of a first cause or the teleological evidence of purposeful design in the universe's structure, rejecting the atheistic denial of any divine reality. , lacking belief in gods or asserting their nonexistence, attributes cosmic origins and order to unguided natural processes without invoking a architect, often citing and hypotheses as sufficient explanations. Deists, however, maintain that such processes imply an originating intelligence, as the universe's contingent existence demands an external, non-contingent cause, distinguishing deism as a form of grounded in philosophical rather than atheistic . Deism contrasts with by preserving a clear ontological separation between the creator and the created , viewing the divine as an external, who established immutable laws but exists apart from material . equates with the totality of existence, identifying the divine as immanent within and identical to , such that the itself constitutes the sacred without a distinct transcendent source. This leads deism to critique views for blurring creator-creation boundaries, potentially undermining moral accountability to a , whereas 's monistic framework dissolves personal divine agency into cosmic processes, aligning more closely with naturalistic worldviews that deists reject on grounds of inadequate explanation for the 's rational order.

Historical Precursors and Early Development

Ancient and Pre-Modern Roots

Xenophanes of Colophon (c. 570–478 BC), an early Greek philosopher, critiqued anthropomorphic depictions of gods in Homeric poetry and proposed a single, eternal deity that perceives, thinks, and governs all things through mind alone, without human-like motion or intervention. This conception emphasized divine unity and immobility, diverging from polytheistic myths and anticipating rational critiques of revealed religion. Plato, in his dialogue Timaeus (c. 360 BC), described the as a benevolent craftsman who fashions the from chaotic matter by imitating eternal, unchanging forms, establishing order through rational design rather than ongoing interference. The resulting world operates according to necessity and probabilistic elements alongside divine intention, reflecting a limited creator role that aligns with later deistic notions of initial setup followed by natural laws. Aristotle, building on these ideas in Metaphysics (c. 350 BC), posited the as the eternal, purely actual first substance that initiates all cosmic motion as a final cause—through being the object of desire and thought—without itself changing or directly engaging the material realm. This immaterial intellect contemplates only itself in eternal bliss, providing a philosophical basis for a non-interventionist prime cause knowable via reason and of nature's . In the Hellenistic and Roman periods, Cicero's (45 BC) synthesized Greek arguments, advocating proofs of divine existence from the universe's design, providence evident in natural order, and human reason, while questioning mythical narratives and emphasizing ethical conduct derived from rational theology over ritual or oracle. These ancient strands of —prioritizing empirical inference and logical deduction over supernatural claims—laid groundwork for deism, though they lacked the explicit rejection of that characterized its modern form. Pre-modern continuations appeared in the revival of classical texts during the (14th–16th centuries), where humanists like integrated Stoic and Aristotelian rationalism into critiques of dogmatic excesses, fostering a view of accessible through and independent of authority. Such ideas persisted amid the Reformation's emphasis on scripture but contributed to emerging tensions between and unaided reason.

Lord Herbert of Cherbury and the Foundations of English Deism (17th Century)

Edward Herbert, 1st Baron Herbert of Cherbury (1583–1648), an English philosopher, soldier, diplomat, and poet, is widely regarded as the father of English Deism for articulating a rational basis for religion independent of scriptural revelation. Born on March 3, 1583, at Eyton-upon-the-Weald-Moors in , Herbert drew from his experiences in military campaigns and diplomatic service abroad to develop ideas emphasizing innate human faculties for discerning truth. His seminal work, De Veritate (On Truth), published in in 1624, established a framework for grounded in reason rather than divine intervention or ecclesiastical authority. In De Veritate, Herbert proposed that truth arises from the interplay of three faculties—natural instinct, internal sense (reason), and external sense ()—which generate "common notions" universally accessible to humanity without reliance on or prophetic claims. He distinguished truth into categories such as natural (from innate ideas), artificial (from human constructs), and historical (from ), arguing that religious truths belong to the natural category, verifiable through rational consensus rather than faith in events. This approach critiqued dogmatic by prioritizing empirical and logical validation, laying groundwork for Deism's rejection of revealed in favor of a knowable through observation of the ordered . Central to Herbert's foundations of Deism were five "common notions" of religion, which he presented as innate principles shared across cultures and eras, derived from reason rather than scripture. These included: (1) the existence of a supreme Deity; (2) the duty to worship this Deity; (3) the chief form of worship being virtue conjoined with piety; (4) the necessity of repentance for wrongdoing; and (5) rewards and punishments administered by divine providence, both in this life and the afterlife. Herbert contended these notions possess qualities of priority (antecedent to experience), universality (held by all rational beings), and certainty (self-evident), forming a minimal, rational creed that transcends sectarian divisions and obviates the need for organized dogma. Herbert's ideas influenced subsequent English Deists by promoting a "religion of nature" that aligned moral and theological principles with observable human consensus, challenging the Anglican establishment's monopoly on truth during the early 17th century's religious upheavals. Though not explicitly atheistic, his framework minimized divine intervention, portraying as a distant whose and imperatives could be inferred from reason and the world's , without appeals to biblical or priestly mediation. Later works like De Religione Laici (1645) reinforced this by advocating lay access to religious truth, further eroding clerical authority and paving the way for Enlightenment .

Enlightenment Expansion

Deism in and the Peak Period (1690s–1750s)

Deism gained prominence in following the lapse of the Licensing Act in 1695, which ended prior censorship and enabled freer publication of rationalist critiques of orthodox Christianity. John Locke's Essay Concerning Human Understanding (1690) provided a philosophical foundation by prioritizing empirical reason over innate ideas or revelation, influencing deists to view religion through natural observation rather than scriptural authority. This intellectual climate fostered the "deist controversy," a series of debates spanning decades where proponents argued for a rational, non-revelatory faith in a creator discernible via nature's design. John Toland's Christianity Not Mysterious (1696) marked the movement's early high point, asserting that true Christianity contained no doctrines above or contrary to reason, dismissing miracles and mysteries as priestly inventions incompatible with a rational . The book, printed in three editions within a year, provoked immediate backlash: it was condemned by the Irish Parliament in 1697 and publicly burned, while in England, it prompted responses from clergy like Edward Stillingfleet, yet sold widely underground, fueling freethinking circles. Anthony Collins advanced this critique in A Discourse of Free-Thinking (1713), which sold 6,000 copies in weeks and elicited over 80 rebuttals; Collins defended unrestricted inquiry into religious claims, equating clerical opposition with suppression of truth, and argued that freethinking cured born of ignorance rather than promoting it. Matthew Tindal's Christianity as Old as the Creation (1730), often called the "bible of deism," synthesized these ideas by positing as a mere republication of innate —moral duties evident from reason and providence—rendering superfluous and organized churches corrupt accretions. Published anonymously, it reached 40 editions by mid-century, sparking responses like Daniel Waterland's Scripture Vindicated (1730-32), but deists like Thomas Woolston (imprisoned 1729 for allegorizing miracles) and Thomas Chubb extended attacks on supernaturalism through pamphlets and the Craftsman journal. By the 1740s-1750s, deism peaked amid such publications, yet waned as David Hume's empiricist skepticism undermined rational proofs of God and evangelical revivals emphasized personal experience over abstract reason.

Deism in France and Continental Europe

Deism entered France in the early 18th century, primarily through translations and adaptations of English deist writings, marking a shift toward rational religion amid Enlightenment critiques of Catholic orthodoxy. After the Regency period following Louis XIV's death in 1715, thinkers like Montesquieu and Voltaire synthesized English influences with French skepticism, concluding an initial wave of deism that emphasized natural theology over revelation. Voltaire (1694–1778), the era's preeminent deist advocate, asserted that reason and observation of the universe's order indisputably proved a creator , while rejecting , , and clerical authority as superstitious impositions. In works such as his Philosophical Dictionary (1764), he promoted a deistic ethic grounded in and benevolence, influencing public discourse by satirizing and advocating tolerance, as seen in his defense of the Calas family in 1762. Voltaire's admiration for Newtonian physics reinforced deism's alignment with empirical science, positioning as a divine who established rational laws without ongoing intervention. Other French proponents included the Marquis d'Argens (1704–1771), a associate who critiqued dogma in philosophical letters, and earlier figures like Henri de Boulainvilliers (1658–1722), who advanced deistic ideas on and historical critique of in the 1720s. These efforts fostered a cultural milieu where deism challenged absolutist , though it faced suppression under until the 1789 Revolution amplified irreligious tendencies. In , deism spread via English texts and local , with (1694–1768) exemplifying its theological rigor. Influenced by English deists during his studies, Reimarus argued in his unpublished Apology for the Rational Worshippers of God (c. 1730s–1760s) that reason alone suffices for knowledge of God and morality, dismissing biblical miracles as incompatible with natural order and portraying Christianity's origins as fraudulent. Posthumous publication of excerpts by in the 1770s as the Wolfenbüttel Fragments ignited the fragments controversy, pitting deistic criticism against orthodox defenders like Johann Melchior Goeze. Carl Friedrich Bahrdt (1741–1792) represented a more radical German deism, revering as a moral teacher and initiate rather than divine, while authoring provocative works that blended deism with biblical reinterpretation to undermine claims. German deism, though less organized than its French counterpart, contributed to Enlightenment debates on providence and ethics, influencing figures like , whose 1780s critiques shifted toward moral rationalism over strict deism.

Deism in the American Colonies and Founding Era

Deism gained traction in the American colonies during the 18th century, imported primarily through English Enlightenment texts and the writings of figures like John Locke and Lord Herbert of Cherbury, emphasizing reason over revelation. By the mid-1700s, colonial intellectuals encountered Deistic ideas via imported books and correspondence, fostering skepticism toward orthodox Christianity's miracles and clergy authority among elites. Benjamin Franklin, in his 1728 "Articles of Belief and Acts of Religion," articulated a Deistic creed affirming a single Creator God who governs via providence but whose will is discerned through rational virtue rather than scripture or dogma. Franklin's early embrace reflected broader colonial exposure, though empirical evidence indicates Deism remained a minority view, confined largely to urban and educated circles amid predominant Protestant adherence. Thomas Paine's 1776 pamphlet Common Sense infused revolutionary rhetoric with Deistic undertones, portraying divine favor through natural rights and human agency, which sold over 100,000 copies and galvanized independence sentiment. Paine later explicitized Deism in The Age of Reason (1794), dedicating it to American citizens while decrying biblical inconsistencies and as superstitious corruptions, arguing for a rational God evident in nature's laws. This work, however, provoked backlash, with sales exceeding 500,000 in America yet eroding Paine's popularity as clergy denounced it for undermining moral foundations rooted in revelation. Thomas Jefferson, principal author of the Declaration of (1776), incorporated Deistic phrasing like "Nature's God" and "Creator" to endow rights, while privately compiling the "" (circa 1820) by excising miracles and Christ's divinity, affirming a non-interventionist deity discerned via reason. Jefferson's correspondence reveals rejection of Trinitarianism and virgin birth, viewing as an ethical teacher rather than divine savior. George Washington's public invocations of "" in addresses, such as his 1783 Circular Letter to the States, aligned with Deistic notions of a guiding yet non-miraculous force, though his Anglican church attendance and avoidance of explicit Deist labels suggest a hybrid rational . Deism influenced founding principles like church-state separation in the First Amendment (1791) and the Constitution's secular framing, omitting direct references to prioritize rational over . Yet, primary documents like the Declaration's appeals to a "Supreme Judge" indicate compatibility with providential , not pure Deism, as strict Deists rejected ongoing divine intervention. Historians note that while Deism shaped elite discourse, grassroots colonial religion remained orthodox Christian, with Deistic influence waning post-Revolution amid revivals like the Second . Claims of majority Deist Founders often stem from selective quoting, overlooking orthodox believers among signers and ratifiers.

Philosophical and Theological Elements

Reliance on Reason and Empirical Observation

Deists assert that genuine religious knowledge arises from the application of human reason to empirical evidence derived from the natural world, eschewing claims of divine revelation or scriptural authority as unreliable or unverifiable. This epistemological stance treats the observable universe—its mathematical precision, gravitational constants, and adaptive biological structures—as primary testimony to a supreme intelligence that initiated creation through rational design, without subsequent supernatural interference. Central to this reliance is the argument from design, wherein the intricate causality and uniformity evident in phenomena like planetary orbits and organic reproduction imply a purposeful originator, knowable solely through sensory data and logical inference rather than faith or prophecy. Pioneering this view, Edward Herbert, 1st Baron Herbert of Cherbury (1583–1648), outlined in his 1624 treatise De Veritate that innate "common notions"—such as the existence of a providential deity and the moral imperative to worship based on natural virtue—emerge universally from rational reflection on nature's order, independent of cultural or revealed traditions. Thomas Paine echoed this in (1794–1795), contending that "the word or works of God in the creation afford to our senses" irrefutable evidence of divinity, which reason alone interprets, dismissing biblical accounts as fabrications contradicted by observable facts like the fossil record and . Similarly, Voltaire (1694–1778) invoked empirical analogies, such as a watch's mechanism presupposing a , to argue that the universe's harmonious laws—governed by principles like Newton's gravity, formulated in 1687—demonstrate a deistic discernible through scientific inquiry, not ecclesiastical dogma. This paradigm elevates empirical verification over dogmatic assertion, positing that contradictions between purported revelations and natural —e.g., geological strata indicating an ancient predating scriptural timelines—undermine the latter's credibility, favoring instead a probabilistic to a non-interventionist creator aligned with causal regularities. Deists thus prioritize falsifiable observations, such as the predictability of eclipses or evolutionary adaptations, as superior grounds for theistic belief, critiquing reliance on untestable miracles as intellectually indolent.

Rejection of Miracles, Revelation, and Organized Religion

Deists maintain that miracles, defined as suspensions or violations of natural laws, are incompatible with a rational who governs the through consistent, observable principles rather than capricious interventions. This position holds that the creator established immutable laws at the moment of creation, after which the functions autonomously, rendering claims of divine miracles logically superfluous and empirically unverifiable, as they rely on anecdotal rather than repeatable . , in his 1794 work , exemplified this critique by dismissing biblical miracles—such as the parting of the or the —as fables requiring undue in human reporters over the uniformity of , arguing that "miracle could be but a thing of the moment, and seen but by a few." The rejection of revelation follows from deism's prioritization of reason and empirical as the sole reliable paths to of the divine, dismissing special or revelations—such as scriptures, prophecies, or personal divine communications—as unverifiable assertions prone to fabrication or misinterpretation. Deists contend that any purported must align with innate rational faculties and the evident order of ; discrepancies, as found in religious texts, indicate human rather than godly disclosure. Paine further argued that revelations in holy books demand a transfer of from the to fallible intermediaries, undermining the direct accessibility of truth through of the world's design. This stance contrasts with traditional theisms, where supplements reason, but deists view it as an unnecessary and often contradictory intermediary that obscures . Organized religion faces deist censure as a historical accretion of superstitions, rituals, and clerical authority atop an original, pristine discernible by reason alone, fostering division, intolerance, and exploitation under the guise of piety. Figures like , a prominent deist sympathizer, lambasted institutional —particularly Catholicism—for perpetuating and priestly dominance, advocating instead a simple theism stripped of dogmas, sacraments, and hierarchies that serve temporal power rather than moral truth. Paine's Age of Reason extended this to a broader indictment, portraying organized faiths as engines of "the most detestable wickedness" through enforced creeds and persecutions, traceable to their reliance on unverifiable miracles and revelations to sustain . Such critiques underscore deism's emphasis on individual conscience over collective imposition, positing that true piety manifests in ethical conduct aligned with natural laws, unmediated by ecclesiastical structures.

Conceptions of Divine Providence, Morality, and the Afterlife

Deists conceived primarily as the impersonal governance of the universe through immutable natural laws established by at creation, rejecting particular interventions such as , , or direct responses to human affairs that would disrupt rational order. This view posits as a distant who designed a self-sustaining system, where apparent providential events arise from the predictable operation of cause and effect rather than fiat. Edward Herbert of Cherbury, an early systematizer of Deist thought, inferred providence from universal human experiences of assistance in distress, but framed it within observable patterns rather than arbitrary divine will. Deist morality derives from reason applied to empirical of and human constitution, emphasizing innate principles of right conduct discoverable without reliance on or ecclesiastical authority. Proponents argued that ethical truths, such as the pursuit of as homage to the creator, stem from a natural moral sense reflecting 's rational design, akin to laws governing physics. Herbert outlined this in his "common notions," including the precept that " conducted by reason is the chief worship of ," positioning moral action as universally accessible via rational reflection rather than scriptural mandates. reinforced this by defining Deist religion as "the belief of one , and an imitation of his ," observable in nature's benevolence and justice. Conceptions of the among Deists centered on the soul's probable and post-mortem accountability for moral deeds, inferred from reason's demand for ultimate in a purposeful creation, though without dogmatic specifics on , , or . Many, including Herbert, maintained that souls persist after to receive rewards or punishments proportionate to virtuous or vicious lives, ensuring cosmic equity absent in a purely materialist view. Paine expressed personal hope for "happiness beyond this life" tied to ethical living, while acknowledging uncertainty, distinguishing Deism from atheism's rejection of and orthodoxy's revealed . This rational served to motivate moral behavior through anticipated consequences, grounded in the universe's evident rather than fear of eternal torment or promise of unearned .

Criticisms, Defenses, and Controversies

Critiques from Traditional Christianity

Traditional Christian theologians, particularly Anglican apologists in the , contended that Deism's exclusive reliance on reason and undermined the necessity of divine for ascertaining essential truths about , , and . They argued that human reason, while capable of discerning a creator's through of the natural order, is inherently limited and prone to error due to finite understanding and moral corruption, rendering it insufficient without supplemental divine disclosure. This perspective held that Deism's dismissal of special —such as the Bible's accounts of miracles, prophecies, and Christ's —left adherents without verifiable historical evidence for 's personal involvement in human affairs, reducing to an abstract, distant architect incapable of relational redemption. Joseph Butler, in his 1736 work The Analogy of Religion, Natural and Revealed, to the Constitution and Course of Nature, systematically addressed Deist objections by drawing parallels between the probabilistic nature of natural religion and revealed Christianity. Butler maintained that just as nature exhibits a probationary system rife with apparent evils and uncertainties—such as suffering and incomplete knowledge—that nonetheless point toward a moral governor, so too does revelation fit analogously, resolving these ambiguities through doctrines like atonement and eternal judgment. He critiqued Deists for arbitrarily halting inquiry at natural religion, asserting that the credibility of miracles and prophecy in Scripture mirrors the everyday acceptance of testimony and historical events, making rejection of revelation inconsistent with rational assent to empirical data. Butler's approach aimed to demonstrate that Deism's rationalism fails to account for the full scope of evidence, including fulfilled prophecies and the resurrection's eyewitness accounts, which cumulatively render Christianity more probable than a non-intervening deity. William Warburton, in The Divine Legation of Moses Demonstrated (1737–1741), advanced a paradoxical argument against Deism by adopting its own principles: the Pentateuch's omission of explicit doctrines on future rewards and punishments, which a merely legislator would include for societal control, evidences divine origin, as only a unconcerned with temporal incentives could promulgate such a law. Warburton contended that this supernatural character of Mosaic legislation refutes Deist claims of unaided reason's sufficiency, proving instead that progressive revelation—culminating in Christ's explicit teachings on afterlife and salvation—provides the moral framework absent in natural theology alone. He further criticized Deism for ignoring the historical progression of divine accommodation to human capacity, evident in Judaism's preparatory role for Christianity, which rational observation alone cannot validate without scriptural attestation. Samuel Clarke, through his Boyle Lectures (1704–1706) and A Discourse Concerning the Unchangeable Obligations of (1705), reinforced these critiques by affirming natural theology's role in establishing God's existence and basic duties but insisting that is indispensable for truths beyond reason's grasp, such as the and salvific grace. Clarke argued against Deist overconfidence in unaided rationality, noting that ethical imperatives derived solely from nature lack the binding force and clarity of scriptural commands, potentially leading to . He emphasized empirical verification of through and fulfillment, which Deism discards as improbable, yet which historical records—corroborated by non-Christian sources like and —substantiate as more reliable than speculative . These critiques collectively portrayed Deism as a truncated faith that, while affirming , severs it from the incarnational and redemptive core of , rendering unattainable through impersonal providence alone. Traditionalists warned that such views erode ecclesiastical authority and doctrinal specificity, fostering skepticism toward the Bible's unique claims, as evidenced by Deist figures like who explicitly rejected scriptural inspiration in favor of rational reconstruction.

Objections from Atheists and Materialists

Atheists and materialists contend that deism posits a without sufficient empirical warrant, as the universe's order and origins can be accounted for through natural processes alone, rendering the hypothesis superfluous under principles of parsimony. In his (1779), , via the skeptical interlocutor , dismantled the deistic by highlighting its limitations: unlike a crafted by , the more closely resembles a self-propagating vegetable, exhibiting vast imperfections, irregularities, and suffering that undermine inferences to a benevolent designer; moreover, the analogy fails to explain the designer's own origin or the causal chains preceding the . The Enlightenment materialist Paul-Henri Thiry, Baron d'Holbach, advanced a stricter in The System of (1770), asserting that possesses inherent, eternal motion and self-organizing properties governed by immutable physical laws, obviating any need for a prime mover or distant architect; he viewed deism as a timid concession to , inconsistently attributing to an uncaused while denying it to itself, and argued that human morality derives from social utility and empirical consequences rather than divine ordinance. Materialists further object that deism evades but does not resolve core explanatory challenges, such as the ultimate origin of natural laws or fine-tuning, which attributes to hypotheses, quantum fluctuations, or inflationary models without intervention; for instance, the singularity, dated to approximately 13.8 billion years ago via radiation measurements, requires no external initiator when interpreted through and . Atheistic philosophers emphasize deism's practical equivalence to atheism—lacking revelation, prayer, or moral imperatives from the deity—yet criticize its retention of a non-falsifiable entity that complicates ontology without explanatory gain, as evolutionary biology, documented through fossil records spanning 3.5 billion years and genetic evidence of common descent, accounts for biological complexity sans teleological intent. This stance aligns with causal realism, prioritizing observable mechanisms over inferred intelligences, though deists counter that initial contingency demands explanation, a debate unresolved by current evidence.

Internal Variants and Debates Within Deism

Deism exhibited internal variants distinguished primarily by the degree of accommodation toward , particularly . Classical or strict deism, exemplified by figures like , emphasized a wholly rational detached from scriptural traditions, portraying as an impersonal who established natural laws without ongoing involvement or moral imperatives derived from revelation. In contrast, , advanced by Matthew Tindal in his 1730 work Christianity as Old as the Creation, sought to distill to its ethical core, affirming as a supreme moral exemplar whose teachings aligned with reason but rejecting doctrines like the , incarnation, and as corruptions. This variant maintained that true primitive was inherently deistic, rendering later ecclesiastical developments superfluous. Debates among deists often centered on the nature and extent of . While all rejected special providence—such as or answered prayers—disagreements arose over general providence, with some viewing as sustaining the universe through immutable laws that implied a benevolent order, as in Lord Herbert of Cherbury's 1624 De Veritate, which posited innate "common notions" including divine rewards and punishments. Others, influenced by Newtonian mechanics, leaned toward a more absentee , debating whether natural laws alone sufficed without implying purposeful moral governance. , for instance, grappled with this in the wake of the , questioning whether a rational creator's design tolerated such apparent indifference to human suffering, though he upheld deistic first principles against atheistic alternatives. Morality's foundations sparked further contention, with deists broadly deriving it from reason and observation rather than , yet varying on its origins. Herbert argued for intuitively grasped virtues as the "chief part of ," universal across humanity. Tindal extended this to claim ethical truths predated and superseded law, accessible via . Debates intensified over determinism's implications, as Anthony Collins in his 1713 Discourse of Free-Thinking and 1715 Philosophical Enquiry Concerning Human Liberty contended that human actions were necessitated by divine foreknowledge and natural causes, yet compatible with moral accountability under rational laws, challenging free-will advocates like who sought to preserve libertarian agency within a deistic framework. Views on the afterlife also diverged, though most deists inferred from divine and the universe's order, as Paine asserted in (1794–1795), where eternal rewards aligned with rational rather than faith. Skeptical strains, however, treated it as speculative, prioritizing empirical over eschatological certainties, reflecting broader tensions between optimistic design arguments and empirical challenges like . These debates underscored deism's emphasis on reason's primacy, yet highlighted its lack of dogmatic unity, allowing individual rational reconstructions over collective .

Decline and Enduring Influence

Factors Leading to Decline Post-Enlightenment

The decline of Deism as a dominant intellectual movement commenced in the late , coinciding with the waning of the Enlightenment's rationalist fervor. Immanuel Kant's (1781) played a pivotal role by demonstrating the limits of human reason in attaining certain of metaphysical entities, including the and attributes of a divine ; Kant argued that traditional proofs for God's , central to deistic arguments from , relied on synthetic a priori judgments that transcend empirical bounds and thus fail to yield demonstrative certainty. This epistemological skepticism eroded the foundational confidence in reason's ability to discern divine order without revelation, prompting a shift toward practical reason and moral postulates over speculative . Concurrent with these philosophical challenges, the emergence of in the late 18th and early 19th centuries emphasized , , and the sublime aspects of over mechanistic , rendering Deism's impersonal, insufficiently evocative of human spiritual yearnings. Romantic thinkers critiqued Enlightenment deism for its abstract detachment, favoring instead experiential and mystical encounters with the divine that aligned more closely with orthodox religious traditions. This cultural pivot diminished Deism's appeal among intellectuals and artists, who increasingly sought transcendent meaning beyond empirical observation alone. Religious revivals further accelerated Deism's marginalization, particularly in the United States during the Second Great Awakening (circa 1790–1840), which promoted emotional conversion experiences, communal worship, and a personally interventionist God in opposition to deistic detachment. Preachers like emphasized free will, moral reform, and supernatural providence, attracting mass participation—evidenced by membership surges in Methodist and Baptist denominations from under 20% of church adherents in 1776 to over 50% by 1840—while portraying Deism as spiritually arid and elitist. In , similar evangelical stirrings and critiques from figures like , whose The Analogy of Religion (1736) anticipated later arguments by highlighting reason's inadequacy against probabilistic faith, reinforced orthodox Christianity's resurgence. Deism's inherent structural frailties compounded these external pressures: its rejection of organized , , and clerical authority left it without institutional mechanisms for propagation or communal bonding, making it vulnerable to more vibrant alternatives amid 19th-century social upheavals like industrialization and . The parallel ascent of and scientific naturalism, exemplified by Charles Darwin's (1859), further undermined the argument from design by offering naturalistic explanations for apparent , though Deism's core tenets had already receded from mainstream discourse by the mid-19th century. These factors collectively relegated Deism to niche philosophical status, supplanted by theistic , , and secular ideologies.

Impact on Science, Politics, and Secular Thought

Deism advanced scientific inquiry during the Enlightenment by conceptualizing the universe as a self-sustaining mechanism designed by a rational creator, encouraging empirical and reason to uncover immutable natural laws rather than seeking explanations through miracles or divine intervention. This view resonated with the mechanistic cosmology of Isaac Newton's Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica (1687), which Deists interpreted as evidence of orderly divine architecture knowable solely through . Figures like , in his Éléments de la philosophie de Newton (1738), popularized Newtonian principles among Deists, fostering a cultural shift that elevated experimental science over theological speculation and contributed to the institutionalization of bodies like the Royal Society, founded in but thriving under Deistic . The Deistic emphasis on a non-interventionist thus insulated scientific progress from religious , promoting the idea that nature's uniformity permitted predictive laws, as evidenced by the 18th-century explosion in astronomical and physical discoveries. In politics, Deism influenced liberal democratic ideals by deriving governance from universal natural rights discerned through reason, independent of clerical authority or revealed religion, thereby supporting and . American Founders such as , who edited the Bible to remove miracles in his (c. 1820), and , who described himself as a Deist in his (1791), embedded these principles in foundational texts; the Declaration of Independence (1776) invokes "the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to justify rebellion against tyranny. 's (1776) and (1794) further disseminated Deistic arguments against monarchy and established religion, advocating based on innate human equality under rational divine order, which informed the U.S. Constitution's omission of religious tests (Article VI, 1787). This framework countered theocratic tendencies in Europe, as seen in Voltaire's critiques of absolutism, promoting and individual liberty across Enlightenment-influenced revolutions. Deism shaped secular thought by subordinating religious claims to verifiable evidence and personal judgment, eroding institutional dogma's monopoly on truth and anticipating modern , , and even atheistic through its minimalist . By rejecting in favor of innate moral senses and observable providence, Deists like Lord Herbert of Cherbury in De Veritate (1624) established reason as the arbiter of , influencing subsequent philosophers to build non-theological systems of morality grounded in utility and . This trajectory is evident in the 19th-century transition to , where Deism's empirical bias persisted minus the creator hypothesis, as Auguste Comte's (1830–1842) echoed Deistic faith in science's self-sufficiency for social order. Deism's legacy in secular governance is apparent in the U.S. First Amendment (1791), which prohibits religious establishments, reflecting Deistic wariness of priestcraft and paving the way for pluralistic, reason-based public discourse that prioritizes human agency over supernatural mandates.

Modern and Contemporary Deism

19th–20th Century Revivals and Adaptations

In the early 19th century, deism saw limited organizational revivals in the United States amid broader religious ferment, exemplified by Elihu Palmer's establishment of the Deistical Society of New York around 1800, which advocated rational inquiry into nature's God while rejecting Christian revelation and miracles. Palmer, a former Presbyterian minister blinded by , lectured extensively on the East Coast, publishing works like Prospects of (1801) to promote deistic principles as a bulwark against . These efforts drew on Enlightenment legacies but faced opposition from evangelical surges, including the Second Great Awakening (circa 1790–1840), which emphasized personal conversion and biblical authority, marginalizing deistic rationalism. Deistic ideas adapted into the 19th-century movement, which flourished in the U.S. and through societies, publications, and lectures critiquing clerical authority while often retaining belief in a creator discernible via reason and science. Freethinkers like , who toured the U.S. in 1828–1829 delivering anti-clerical speeches, blended deism with secular reform, influencing labor and advocates; her Course of Popular Lectures (1829) echoed deistic emphasis on natural morality over revealed dogma. In , Unitarianism incorporated deistic elements, prioritizing reason and a unitary , as seen in Harvard's faculty and curricula where deistic texts shaped elite education until mid-century evangelical pressures. This adaptation softened deism's anti-Christian edge, fostering liberal theologies that rejected trinitarianism but preserved ethical . By the late 19th century, overt deism waned as Darwinian evolution and shifted toward and , though deistic undertones persisted in positivist "" proposals by (1850s), which posited a grounded in observable laws akin to deistic . In the , deism manifested more in individual adaptations than organized revivals, particularly among intellectuals reconciling with ; , the first moonwalker in 1969, identified as a deist by his high school years, viewing through reason rather than , as reflected in his rejection of . Such personal endorsements highlighted deism's enduring appeal in technical fields, where empirical evidence supported a non-interventionist creator, but lacked the institutional momentum of earlier eras.

Recent Developments and Neo-Deism (2000s–Present)

In the , deism saw limited but persistent activity through dedicated online platforms and organizations promoting it as a rational alternative to . The World Union of Deists, active since 1993, expanded its outreach via websites and publications emphasizing God as discernible through reason and natural laws rather than revelation, producing materials like essays on Thomas Paine's deism and critiques of . Similarly, the Church of the Modern Deist established an online presence to discuss deistic ethics and the compatibility of belief in a creator with scientific , hosting videos and forums questioning atheistic . Neo-deism emerged as an adaptation integrating 21st-century science, such as and cosmology, while rejecting intervention. Advocates describe it as prioritizing evidence-based inference of a divine behind universal order, often via personal reflection over institutional authority, as articulated in proponent resources distinguishing it from cults through its non-dogmatic structure. Digital deism, a , leverages communities for discourse on rational , with groups like Deism For The World fostering discussions on nature-derived among hundreds of members. Key publications reinforced these efforts, including Bob Johnson's Deism: A Revolution in Religion, a Revolution in You (2010), which argues deism aligns with empirical and against scriptural dependence. The World Union of Deists' ongoing store offerings, such as Why We Became Deists (post-2000 editions), target converts from and by highlighting deism's empirical foundations. Scholarly commentary, like a 2023 Philosophy Now article, notes these groups' role in sustaining deism amid , though it remains a niche without mass appeal. Sociological observations link deistic elements to broader trends, such as Moralistic Therapeutic Deism—a 2005 concept from researcher Christian Smith describing prevalent U.S. youth beliefs in a non-interventionist God prioritizing personal well-being—which parallels deism's distant deity but dilutes it with vague moralism unsupported by strict rationalism. Despite online growth, surveys indicate deism constitutes under 1% of religious identification, confined largely to intellectual and ex-religious circles rather than institutional revival.

References

  1. https://philosophynow.org/issues/152/Deism_Traditional_and_Contemporary
  2. https://nationalhumanitiescenter.org/tserve/eighteen/ekeyinfo/deism.htm
  3. https://biologos.org/articles/did-deism-lead-to-natural-theology
  4. https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Herbert_of_Cherbury
  5. https://utppublishing.com/doi/pdf/10.3138/uram.18.4.264
  6. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/337636549_Five_Principles_of_Deism
  7. https://creation.com/deism-and-divine-revelation
  8. https://www.dictionary.com/compare-words/deism-vs-theism
  9. https://www.theismvsdeism.com/lesson/intro-lesson/
  10. https://www.theosophical.org/files/events/MahatmaLetters/About_God.pdf
  11. https://chab123.wordpress.com/2011/02/16/a-comparison-between-theism-deism-pantheism-and-polytheism-which-god-or-gods-shall-we-pick/
  12. https://unbelievableatheist.com/atheism-vs-deism/
  13. https://divineatheist.quora.com/Is-there-really-any-practical-difference-between-a-deist-and-an-atheist
  14. https://iep.utm.edu/xenoph/
  15. https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/9275/is-there-a-pantheistic-religion-built-by-xenophanes
  16. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-timaeus/
  17. https://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/47658/was-aristotle-the-earliest-founder-of-deism
  18. https://qcurtius.com/2023/08/26/the-new-translation-of-ciceros-on-the-nature-of-the-gods-is-now-available/
  19. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Stoicism/Stoicism-in-medieval-and-modern-philosophy
  20. https://www.ewadirect.com/proceedings/chr/article/view/1280
  21. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/freethought-freedom-english-deists
  22. https://www.britannica.com/topic/De-Veritate
  23. http://dbanach.com/archive/mickelsen/herbert.html
  24. https://archive.org/details/adiscourseoffree00colluoft
  25. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23040156
  26. https://archive.org/details/christianityasol00tind
  27. https://heritage.humanists.uk/deism/
  28. https://oll.libertyfund.org/publications/reading-room/2023-06-14-donway-voltaire-french-enlightenment
  29. https://thelycaeum.wordpress.com/2014/02/23/voltaire-the-divorce-of-metaphysics-from-science-and-deism/
  30. https://enlightenmentdeism.com/french-deists-other-than-french-revolutionary-deists/
  31. https://www.biblicaltraining.org/library/hermann-samuel-reimarus
  32. https://enlightenmentdeism.com/list-of-enlightenment-deists/the-german-deists/
  33. https://www.varsitytutors.com/earlyamerica/early-america-review/volume-16/franklin-free-will-deism
  34. https://www.history.com/articles/thomas-paine-common-sense-revolution
  35. https://www.archives.gov/news/articles/thomas-paine-attitudes-biography
  36. https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/jeffersons-religious-beliefs/
  37. https://www.gilderlehrman.org/history-resources/essays/thomas-jefferson-and-deism
  38. https://www.mountvernon.org/library/digitalhistory/digital-encyclopedia/article/george-washington-and-religion
  39. https://csac.history.wisc.edu/2025/07/17/deism-and-the-founders/
  40. https://allthingsliberty.com/2021/07/divine-providence-and-deism-in-the-declaration-of-independence/
  41. https://www.cato-unbound.org/2020/06/22/thomas-kidd/deists-orthodox-believers-american-founding
  42. https://www.masters.edu/master_tmu_news/the-faith-of-the-founding-fathers/
  43. https://www.delanceyplace.com/view-archives.php?p=2273
  44. https://sveinbjorn.org/voltaire_d_holbach_and_the_design_argument
  45. https://scholarship.rollins.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1011&context=mls
  46. https://edwardworthlibrary.ie/exhibitions-at-the-worth/smaller-exhibitions/deism-and-the-early-enlightenment-at-the-worth-library/
  47. https://learn.ligonier.org/articles/field-guide-on-false-teaching-deism
  48. https://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/paine/works/age-reason/ch01.htm
  49. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-worldhistory/chapter/19-4-4-voltaire/
  50. https://www.christianpublishers.org/post/how-did-the-enlightenment-challenge-christian-belief-and-shape-the-modern-world
  51. https://philosophiesoflife.org/voltaires-philosophy/
  52. https://spiritualcritiques.com/deism-and-miracles/
  53. https://www.ushistory.org/paine/reason/reason15.htm
  54. https://www.steelsnowflake.org/post/paine-deism
  55. https://research.colonialwilliamsburg.org/Foundation/journal/Spring09/deism.cfm
  56. https://teachingamericanhistory.org/document/age-of-reason-part-2/
  57. https://thewayofimprovement.blog/2011/08/19/deism-and-providence/
  58. https://www.stgilesonline.org/post/edward-lord-herbert-of-cherbury-c-1583-1648
  59. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/natural-law-ethics/
  60. https://www.reddit.com/r/DebateReligion/comments/10rksb/to_deists_afterlife/
  61. https://apologeticspress.org/thomas-paine-lost-his-common-sense-2605/
  62. https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/lysander-spooner-the-deist-s-immortality-and-an-essay-on-man-s-accountability-for-his-belief
  63. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/clarke/
  64. https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/deism-and-revealed-religion
  65. https://books.google.com/books/about/The_Analogy_of_Religion.html?id=sj68DQAAQBAJ
  66. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/butler-moral/
  67. https://archive.org/details/bim_eighteenth-century_the-divine-legation-of-m_warburton-william_1742_2
  68. https://www.bartleby.com/lit-hub/volume-ix-english-from-steele-and-addison-to-pope-and-swift/16-opponents-of-the-deists-william-warburton/
  69. https://quod.lib.umich.edu/g/genpub/ClarkDisco/1:6?rgn=div1;view=fulltext
  70. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/hume-religion/
  71. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/holbach/
  72. https://www.quora.com/What-arguments-do-atheists-use-against-deism-Is-atheism-considered-more-rational-than-deism
  73. https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/kant-religion/
  74. https://iep.utm.edu/kant-rel/
  75. https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/reasons-shadow-romanticisms-impact-on-catholic-thought/
  76. https://www.cambridge.org/core/books/cambridge-history-of-english-romantic-literature/romanticism-and-religious-modernity-from-natural-supernaturalism-to-literary-sectarianism/4A4B68448B8CCEA39613289F5BD5D5D7
  77. https://christianhistoryinstitute.org/magazine/article/return-of-the-spirit-second-great-awakening
  78. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/religion-and-philosophy/second-great-awakening
  79. https://www.ebsco.com/research-starters/history/deism
  80. https://answersresearchjournal.org/science/philosophy-science-4/
  81. https://iep.utm.edu/american-enlightenment-thought/
  82. https://www.deism.com/post/the-deistic-roots-of-the-united-state-of-america
  83. https://tcdecker.com/2023/01/21/a-brief-history-of-secular-thought/
  84. https://www.studysmarter.co.uk/explanations/religious-studies/belief-systems/deism/
  85. https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/elihu-palmer/
  86. https://ffrf.org/publications/day/elihu-palmer/
  87. https://oxfordre.com/americanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199329175.001.0001/acrefore-9780199329175-e-1153
  88. https://oxfordre.com/religion/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199340378.001.0001/acrefore-9780199340378-e-1221
  89. https://americanhumanist.org/what-is-humanism/saga-freethought-pioneers-religious-critique-social-reform/
  90. https://library.gbc.edu/az/nineteenth-century-collections-online-religion-reform-and-society
  91. https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/freethought-freedom-deism-age-reason-richard-carlile
  92. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/anxiousbench/2018/10/first-man-spiritual-life-neil-armstrong/
  93. https://hollowverse.com/neil-armstrong
  94. https://www.deism.com/
  95. https://moderndeist.org/
  96. https://www.neodeism.com/neo-deism-faq/
  97. https://www.neodeism.com/digital-deism-a-rational-faith-in-the-age-of-online-communities/
  98. https://www.facebook.com/groups/DeismForTheWorld/
  99. https://www.goodreads.com/shelf/show/deism
  100. https://www.deism.com/store
  101. https://realclearcatholic.com/2019/05/26/americas-not-so-new-religion-of-deism/
  102. https://www.quora.com/Does-deism-still-exist-and-if-so-is-it-on-the-rise-in-the-US
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.