View
all articles
Players at the Worldview Table: Deism - It's a Clockwork Universe
In his continuing series on the fundamental differences between worldviews, Doc Leland focuses on deism. Deists believe that God created the universe and then abandoned it to operate under the natural laws He had created. This belief is based solely on reason, rather than revelation from Scripture or the teachings of any specific religion.
Living in a Clockwork World
"Thomas Paine is my personal lord and savior," boasts one Amazon.com customer's review of Paine's treatise on religion, The Age of Reason.1 In his famous deistic and antibiblical work, Paine rips the basic theistic view and attempts to undercut Scripture, book by book and verse by verse.
While many believed that Paine was promoting atheism, he in fact espoused deism. Deism is the belief, based solely on reason, that the one true God created the universe, but then left it to run on its own. Webster's 1828 Dictionary describes the key difference between theism and deism to be a lack of God's revelation and interaction with His creation.
Webster's definition makes it sound simple enough; however, a much more profound chasm separates Christian theism and deism. In the deist's view, the world is like a pocket watch, wound up at the beginning of time and running on its own.
An Absent God
Remember Bette Midler's song, "From a Distance"? The lyrics include, "God is watching us, from a distance." But, what's He doing out there? Good question.
Very much like theism, deists contend that there is one authoritative God and He was indeed the Creator of the universe. However, the deistic God does not interact with His creation. To expand on the definition in Webster's 1828 Dictionary, we are not able to be in direct communication with Him through prayer; He does not reach down from Heaven and heal or intercede on our behalf. He simply created the universe with natural laws of operation and then left us to follow the natural order of things without His intervention.
When it comes to deism, I like to visualize the following: Imagine a well maintained, one way road called "time." Throughout history, mankind has traveled the middle of this road using experiences and intellect to stay on track. Occasionally, however, mankind finds itself doing wrong and, as a result, traveling too close to the edge of the road. Instead of running off the road completely, however, mankind self-corrects — attempts to right the wrong — and in doing so, is able to move back toward the middle of the road. Deists consider this the natural order of things. Absent from the journey: God.
In part one of this series, I contended that the worldview battle comes down to either "God is or God isn't." Deists appear to believe "God is," but don't be fooled. Deism may appear similar to theism in many ways. After all, don't both worldviews talk about one true God who created us? Yup, but that's about where the similarities end.
Who's the Boss?
Perhaps one of the reasons that deism was so appealing to Paine and other intellectuals of the 17th and 18th centuries was because of the religion's basis in human reason rather than revelation. After all, this era was filled with the intellectual fruits of "The Enlightenment" — it was the age of Descartes ("I think, therefore I am.") Many people felt that man's reason was all that was needed to guide moral and practical living; God need not be appealed to.
So, if God isn't the boss, then who is? We are.A Closed Barrel Cosmos
One fundamental contention about the cosmos is required for a deistic relationship between God and man to exist: the cosmos must be a "closed system" — meaning that God cannot intervene in our world and we cannot enter into His. It is very much like a barrel with both ends closed up. Nothing can get in or out. Theism, on the other hand, relies on an "open barrel" through which things can flow freely in and out.
Deism needs to keep God out so we can make our own rules and deal with issues on our own. In this belief system, no miracles are possible — no supernatural intervention. This led Thomas Jefferson (who I believe was at least for some of his life a deist) to create the Jefferson Bible, in which he cut out the portions of Scripture that referred to God's intervention in our world. The biggest omission that comes to mind? The life of Jesus — the ultimate intervention.
See a problem?
A Few More Cogs in the Machine
So, in the deistic world what role do you and I play? We are relational and personal, but the bottom line is that we are merely cogs in the big machine. We travel along that naturally ordered "road" the best we can using our experiences and intellect.
Deists also believe that we were born good. We are not a fallen people and, therefore, not in need of redemption. Combine that with the deistic view that Jesus' life isn't an intervention by God in this world and some stark differences begin to appear between deism and theism.
What's Right or Wrong?
For deists, the issue of ethics is based on human experience, rather than Scriptural revelation. They believe that God did reveal Himself, but only in the general revelation of our natural surroundings and a set of natural laws by which the universe operates. Then God abandoned His creation — this natural order of the universe — to run on its own.
In turn, God also left man free to interpret the world around him using only reason and a sort of natural, internal moral compass. In the deist's view, man uses these naturally ordered tools of thought to develop ethical systems. The deist's naturally-ordered universe is considered the norm, and thereby serves as the benchmark by which we know what is right and wrong.
Remember the deist's naturally ordered road of "time"? During the journey, we inevitably move to the edges of the road and then self-correct when we realize what we are doing (individually or collectively) is wrong. Based on the deist's way of thinking, Hitler's Nazi Holocaust would be one big example of a culture seeing an individual and his followers go too far and then acting to self-correct.
Do you see another problem, though?
Leaving man free to interpret what is right and what is wrong undoubtedly leads to conflicting ideas of ethical standards. There is no revelation from God through Scripture to define consistent standards.
Today's Deism: Just Old Hat?
The reality of today's worldview table is that deism is not just talked about in historical terms ("those old dead guys from the revolutionary war believed it"). Instead, there is evidence that many people have adopted an almost neo-deistic way of thinking. I believe that as these people encounter deism's shallow answers to crucial questions, it becomes a sort of "pass-through worldview" instead of a final landing place. (C.S. Lewis is a great example of someone who moved from atheism to a belief in an intelligent designer — a.k.a., a deist — to a Christ follower.)
Today, these "new deists" include people who have left theism but are not willing to give up the idea of an ultimate authority/creator — God. It also includes people who have found atheistic naturalism (the next article in this series) lacking credibility and realize the need to include a designer in their worldview.
The Deistic Consequences
Most people that are indeed deists probably don't even know there is a name for their worldview. In reality, when we leave God in the position of being confined to a reality outside of our own, we become the masters of our own lives.
I recently interacted with a group of self-proclaimed deists who, because of their beliefs, have two things in common:
- They have a vast distrust of authority of any kind.
- They have been burned by the church or by Christians.
These commonalities are both a result of their deistic thinking and a reason for them to think about God in deistic ways. To them God is an autocratic dictator whose followers are legalistic tyrants. Not the picture of the Gospel that I know.
C O F F E E S H O PChristians often say that we believe in God's divine intervention, but the way we live our lives (worry, mistrust, lack of faith) shows that we often actually live as Deists. Do you think this is true?
Join the discussion!
The challenge for each of us is to better understand where deists are coming from and to honestly and authentically present the face of Christ that understands their hurt, and bring them the truth in love and compassion. It may look and sound similar to theism, but I believe that when put into practice, deism sits squarely in the seat of "God isn't" at the worldview table.
- A bit of background information may be helpful here. Thomas Paine was an influential writer during the American Revolutionary War (remember learning about his very successful pamphlet, Common Sense, in history class?) and one the Founding Fathers of the U.S.
A few years after leaving the newly formed United States, Paine found himself squarely in the middle of the French Revolution. It was during the Reign of Terror that he wrote The Age of Reason. In fact, part one of this treatise on religion was published while he was in prison for criticizing the Jacobins, the political club of the French Revolution. Paine narrowly escaped the guillotine when he was released in 1794 after the downfall of the radical faction that led the revolutionary government.
Although The Age of Reason espouses deism, it earned Paine a reputation as an atheist. This misinterpretation of his work garnered much criticism and alienated most of his old friends. In 1802, Paine returned to the U.S. on an invitation from Thomas Jefferson. However, because his religious views were overshadowing his service to the American Revolution, Paine was not able to once again prosper in the U.S. He died in poverty on June 8, 1809 in New York City at the age of 72. Back^
Dr. Chris Leland is the Director of College & University Outreach for the Focus on the Family Institute and author of the Truth Lab. A Senior Fellow for Christian Worldview Studies, "Doc" Leland speaks around the country for Focus, debates people much smarter than himself, and enjoys outdoor activities with his wife and four sons.
Artist's thoughts
"Using the blue and red pill analogy from The Matrix, I thought that the battle for truth would best be represented by a good ol' fashioned arm wrestling match at the table of worldviews. Each participant is trying to convince the other, or feed the other's mind." — Luke Flowers
Image created by Luke Flowers. © 2006 Focus on the Family. All rights reserved.
Back to top
