AH Challenge make deism an influential force.

I don't know whether this belongs in the pre 1900 site as the point of divergence is probably sometime in the 19th century. Deism was at its height in the enlightenment but in mid Victorian times it began to be replaced by atheism and god without religion was replaced by the converse with Marxism and secular humanism and deism seemed to vanish into obscurity. Many of the founding fathers were deists something the Tea Part seems to forget

However there is a case for reviving it as arguably it does not conflict with scientific discoveries such as the anthropic principle by which various phys8icalo forces are balanced to enable life to exist. The alternative is the multiverse but even its proponents argue that intelligent life could start another universe via a black hole. It allows for intelligent design without evolution denial. i.e The late Sir Fred Hoyle argued that there might be a design driving life. Olaf Stapledon's Star Maker is a deist view of the universe with a disiniterested Star Majkerc creating numerous universes and shunning contact with consciousness.

In other words "its life Jim but not as we know it." a Deistic god would not find that offensive as it would be indifferent. Your challenge is to either to maker deism a force in the world or prevent it from declining
 
Who says we aren't an influential force? :)

It's not really clear that Deism really vanished, it could easily be argued that it simply evolved and merged with some of the institutions you mentioned already. In addition, there was also Unitarianism, which absorbed quite a few deists.

I think the problem is that Deism isn't really an organized religion, but rather more of a personal philosophy. Perhaps if you could make it into an organized religion. You also have to have this organization somehow survive the various forces working against it: it's relationship with the French Revolution, the Great Awakening, rise of atheism, etc.

However, if you think about it, the beliefs of (classical) deism sort of make organizing the religion somewhat difficult, although not impossible. An impersonal god who no longer has any influence over the world (or at least for whom the concept of influencing of not influencing doesn't even make any sense due to its cosmic complexity) wouldn't really care at all how or if it were worshiped. Without any 'sacred revelation', there's nothing to define how a 'liturgy' would progress, and even if some Deists could come up with something, others might not like it. (I personally would find it rather dull if the weekly service consisted of reading and discussing passages from, say, Matthew Tindall, and I suspect I'm not alone).
 
Top