Why not deism?

[Anomalocaris]

Creation is not intervention?

If we accept that creation is like a mechanism capable of independent operation (ie it's more like a clock than a march box car), then there is no requirement for continuous intervention.   In such a case, it seems to me a deist god is just a god that let his creation that runs by itself for a longer stretch of time than other ideas of god.

A Diest is just a theist who doesn't think it is right to cry for mommy whenever the light is turned out, but is still comforted by the notion of a mommy.

The Abrahamic god routinely intervenes in the Cosmos (at least according to the manuals).  In theory, then, it should be at least possible to find some evidence that this meddling has taken place.  One would not expect to find such evidence if the Cosmos was created by a god who stopped at creation and then went its merry way.

And no, creation is not intervention.

Boru

It seems to me the distinction between creation and intervention is rather arbitrary.    Presumably the act of creation in the deist sense involves ordering the creation that it can operate on its own.   There is not necessarily any way to distinguish a god who A) created the universe and ordered it at that very instant, and then left it alone, from B) one that created the universe, ordered it for a long time, and then abandoned it in the comparatively recent past,  or C) one who continues to reorder the universe, but do so in such a way that he leaves no discernible evidence that a previous, different order, had existed to betray the reordering.

The only certain distinction would be if a interventionist god reorder the universe in such a way that evidence of a previous, different order can still be clearly discerned after the reordering.