For anyone seeking truth, or something approximate to it, finding the way is not easy. If the first steps entail walking away from established religious tradition a sense of being bereft can become pervasive.
This often leads to a spiritual tourism where various religious alternatives are tried and found wanting. Their similarity to the established religious traditions they claim to eschew becomes apparent: formal or informal hierarchies, leaders who may or may not be charismatic and/or divinely inspired, some creed to be adhered to, an insistence their way is the only true way.
The result often is the experience of such schismatic sects reinforces a rejection of religion, with the adoption of an unsatisfactory agnostic or even atheistic position. However, a feeling that there is something more remains.
Careful consideration, and a determination not to be bound by previous experiences, can then lead to a rational examination of what can be personally observed. A starting point is questioning notion that the creation of the universe, unlike everything that is within it, had no cause of its own.
If there was an initial cause that brought the universe into being it was unique, different to all subsequent causation by not being the result of some previous effect. Otherwise it would, by definition, not be the First Cause.
Also, the order perceived in the universe, that it operates according to discernable laws and had to be precisely as it is for life to emerge and evolve into humans is surely not accidental.
There is nothing in the universe that isn’t the result of a chain of creation that continues to develop. It is hardly a step to then come to the conclusion that creation has a creator.
Such a creator is not the anthropomorphic Deity of the Abrahamic religions. The universe does not demonstrate geometric perfection or evidence of constant omnipotent correction.
It appears creation may well have been a singular act with little or no subsequent interference by the Creator. If there are continuing divine influences they must be according to the Creator’s purpose and not the result of human imprecations.
The universe is manifestly not perfect, but that may not be the point, rather that its being is in itself significant. Also, if perfection had been achieved the universe would surely have reached stasis as any further developments would have led to imperfection. The lack of perfection makes the universe a dynamic, continually developing process.
Perhaps, the Creator wants or needs creation to be perceived and understood, at least to some extent, and that is a role humanity presently plays. Indeed, we are active consciously in shaping our small corner of creation and in that sense we are the Creator’s agents.
Maybe humanity’s purpose to develop consciousness of creation and to employ this gift as part of the on-going dynamic development: through us at least we can be sure the universe is aware of its own existence. Might divine providence be channelled to us in this way?
Deism is more than a rational speculation about the existence of God. It is an understanding that we are of creation as much as any other feature, part of the whole. Nature itself is the Word of God and we have the ability to learn, understand and interpret that language.
The universe is an objective reality and while our reactions to it may be subjective they can be filtered through reason to reach conclusions in accordance with that objective reality. If there is an element of faith in deist belief in God it is not a faith in contradiction with objective reality.
Deism is not a licence to believe in just anything, it is demanding of the individual to use reason so as to draw conclusions verified by being in concert with those arrived at by fellow deists.
This is not to preclude differences; they will arise according to various interpretations of observations of nature. As the ultimate nature of God/Creator/First Cause/Whatever is beyond human fathoming perhaps the one shared conclusion deists can agree on is that Deus is not beyond reason.
deismuk 