Hal Bidlack, the speaker at THIS site discusses why skeptics aren't always atheists. He's a Deist -- he believes in a god but he doesn't think the god needs prayers or interferes in human affairs. It takes about fifteen minutes to download the mp3 file (21MB). Might be interesting for skeptics to hear a deist skeptic.

I think that the belief in a transcendent god probably meets the need, of a number of people. I don't think the motivation is much different from those traditional beliefs where an imminent, inscrutable god, who fiddles with the machinery (upon receiving the appropriate requests and homage) fills a need. I see no reason why skepticism should necessarily make exceptions in the case of gods. I'd be interested in hearing what someone more knowledgeable (reasonable ?)than myself, (JR comes to mind) thinks about this "agnosticism light". Weren't the founding fathers of this nation, for the most part, Deists?

Interesting points, Frank. Hope some learned ones will join in. I had never made the distinction between deists and theists that Bidlack makes. I thought deists were theists.

In the meantime, until some learned ones come along: I've learned that theism means (pathology) "the toxic effects of excessive tea drinking".

I think the so-called Founding Fathers hedged their bets, and played their cards close to their vests. For public consumption, they tried to seem middle of the road. In personal letters, they tended to reveal their true viewpoints. I do not think the majority of them were even Deists, but rather, agnostics or even atheists. As I have said before, they suckled at the breast of the European Enlightenment. They witnessed what had happened with the unholy relationship of Church and State in Western Europe. The big problem now is that fundamentalists quote their public writings, in the hopes of proving the US was founded on "Christian principles". They'd likely gag on what has been said about them.

All I can add is that I have been drinking tea almost every day for breakfast for the last 47 of my __ years and that yes, I am a theist . . . I think.

quote:

I am a theist

Pekoe-boo!

You just can't leaf these chances to brew up some awful pun alone, can you?

(Is this a case of the pot calling the kettle..?)

quote:

You just can't leaf these chances to brew up some awful pun alone, can you?

Your characterization fits me to a T. But I can be very cozy about it.

But we can't keep swapping puns. Some moderator will show up and start tannin our behinds.

quote:

But we can't keep swapping puns. Some moderator will show up and start tannin our behinds.

I think you've both used up your quota of puns, and have pretty much reached the dregs now, haven't you?

quote:

Originally posted by dg:

quote:

But we can't keep swapping puns. Some moderator will show up and start tannin our behinds.

I think you've both used up your quota of puns, and have pretty much reached the dregs now, haven't you?

Yes, indeed. Leaf it for now, is what I say.

I was at an international folk festival the other day. There was a clothing theme to the music; an Italian sang about hats, a German sang about jackets, a Swede sang about socks... and a Lap sang shoe songs.

Sounds like a clothes call.

Everyone wore T-shirts.

quote:

Originally posted by juanruiz:

quote:

I am a theist

Pekoe-boo!

Did you hear about the boo-boo job? Some lassie's boob job was botched: the plastic in them somehow got them to stick together, requiring more surgery to pry them apart. No, I did not make this one up: I saw them on TV . . . stuck together.

This thread is getting t-oolong.