RE: Coming to a mutual agreement and some rambling.
July 18, 2012 at 2:55 am
(This post was last modified: July 18, 2012 at 3:00 am by Mystic.)
(July 17, 2012 at 10:07 pm)FallentoReason Wrote: I don't understand how one can be Deist. The reason I'm not any sort of theist is because I believe that no religion has got it right i.e. their version of god doesn't exist. But to be a Deist, where do I get my information about God? Where does it all start?
I guess in a way I'm trying to continue on from your conclusion that either choice 1 or 2 are logical. Well, Deism doesn't make too much sense to me.
Well I think it's circular to argue for God on a basis of religion. Suppose a Creator exists, and sends a million books from the sky at once, describing whom he is. Why should we believe in him? If he talks to us all together, why should we believe in him? Only if you know he is truthful to begin with, can you know to trust him. But on what basis would you know? Because the books/religion says so. That is circular reasoning.
So Islam for example, has to say we have knowledge of God already.
So I don't think religions can escape knowing God in a properly basic manner and assert religion is the way to know God.
The thing that seems to be at the core of our knowledge about God is that there is Being that is great to the extent he can't be greater. From this we can rationally derive he cannot lack any quality that would make him greater. From this, we can know he must not lack compassion, mercy, love, generosity, power, wisdom, etc.
