If those of the French Enlightenment became deist to reject the Church?

Question

why is the deism of ID considered a threat to the separation of Church and State?

Since Voltaire was a deist, is teaching Candide a Trojan Horse for getting religion into school? Should we take out the phrase "Nature's God" from the Declaration of Independence in case some child becomes a Baptist after reading it?

Paintmeblue: I do in fact know a thing or two about the French Enlightenment. But I enjoy your pomp.

"I have no need to be taught artificial forms of worship; the dictates of nature are sufficient" -- from Rousseau's Emile.

Answer 1

I'm more concerned with the lack of testable evidence.

But that's a good question.

Answer 2

I doubt many high schools are teaching Candide anyway. Teaching any great work of literature or political thought is not a violation of the separation of church and state. Teaching about the Bible, as a literary or cultural work, is not a violation for that matter either.

Deism is not a threat to the separation anymore than Christianity (or Islam or Buddhism) is. If deism were adopted nationally, it would be to the exclusion of other belief systems, including Christianity.

The Declaration of Independence is not a legal document concerning the government. It was written before the American state of secularism was debated and established. There is a reason, however, the Constitution makes absolutely no mention of God or a Creator. I'll wager that we can thank Jefferson, Madison, and Paine for that.

Answer 3

You don't actually know very much about the enlightenment, do you?

The church was a huge political power. Thats where diests came from. They were rejecting the french church, not church in general.

Candide says nothing about religion. Nothing positive, at least. Its a political satire mocking the power and idiocy of the government and the church.


Edit: If you'd known anything about the french revolution, you wouldn't have asked this question. Or brought up Candide. Have you ever even read it? What you call my 'pomp' is called education. Try it some time, it sounds like you need it.

Answer 4

It does seem sensible to teach ID, and deism. Extremism on either side of this silly battle seem to miss the point of giving our children a balanced education. If ID doesn't have sufficient evidence to justify its teaching in a science class, why not teach this topic in social studies? It is influencial in our society, if you believe its possible or not.

And to think that Candide isn't likely to be taught in public schools is just kind of sad really. What a great tool, addressing so many topics in such a funny way. I still chuckle reading that story.

Why shouldn't we want our children to be taught what an atheist, agnostic, gnostic, Buddhist, Hindi, Muslim, Christian, JW or Mormon believe? What's wrong with having a balanced approach?

The real problem, in my view, is that fact that the NEA dictates much of the curriculum, and that 'Secular Humanism' in its Godless, religious form, has found a strong place in the minds of our public school educators. But even this perspective has a place, as long as it is represented accurately.

Answer 5

"deism of ID"? I presume that ID stands for "intelligent design", that old creationist kobold in a rented tux?

I don't mind if you talk about ID in comparative religion, but "God did it" will never be an acceptable endpoint for anything taught in a science class. It is a dead end. It is in many ways the antithesis of science.

I have no idea where you got the 'threat to separation' bit from.

Answer 6

In the 18th, and 19th centuries, being a deist was associated with being an atheist. Atheism wasn't as popular or as accepted as it is now. The zeitgeist of the era is different.

The problem with ID is that it tries to claim deism, but it is strongly Christian, which is obvious from the donors to the Discovery Institute as well as admitted by some of their leaders such as Dembski.

Answer 7

With Voltaire and Jefferson, you can say, "That was their opinion. This is a product of the times in which they lived. Everyone wrote like that." You don't get qualifiers like that in seventh-grade biology. Science is taught as fact. I do wish teachers could say more often, "As far as we know" or "Current evidence points to," etc.

Answer 8

Not sure I follow you here. "Those" of the French enlightenment became what ever they became in order to justify dumping their king. The Bible tells us to honor the king. They had to disassociate their beliefs, and make the Bible out to be mythology in order to justify their actions. Otherwise they could be called heretics. Hmmm.