1.0Sgwrs Tei Bowhttp://52.19.228.105/cyClarke Robertshttp://52.19.228.105/cy/author/clarke-roberts/rich600338<blockquote class="wp-embedded-content" data-secret="rOL0PJ8fcV"><a href="http://52.19.228.105/cy/2013/03/02/in-defence-of-deism/">Er amddiffyn Deidiaeth.</a></blockquote><iframe sandbox="allow-scripts" security="restricted" src="http://52.19.228.105/cy/2013/03/02/in-defence-of-deism/embed/#?secret=rOL0PJ8fcV" width="600" height="338" title="“In defence of Deism.” — Bow Tie Talks" data-secret="rOL0PJ8fcV" frameborder="0" marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" scrolling="no" class="wp-embedded-content"></iframe><script> /*! This file is auto-generated */ !function(d,l){"use strict";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&"undefined"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!/[^a-zA-Z0-9]/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret="'+t.secret+'"]'),c=new RegExp("^https?:$","i"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display="none";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute("style"),"height"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):"link"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute("src")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener("message",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener("DOMContentLoaded",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll("iframe.wp-embedded-content"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute("data-secret"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+="#?secret="+t,e.setAttribute("data-secret",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:"ready",secret:t},"*")},!1)))}(window,document); //# sourceURL=http://52.19.228.105/wp-includes/js/wp-embed.min.js </script>By recommendation from Dr Ann Christie at York St John University and inspired from a lecture I attended yesterday regarding how theology can help us understand the environmental crises we now face, it is to an extension of a previous article I wrote¹ that I turn this afternoon. The theologian at the centre of discussion in the lecture was an American eco-feminist named Sallie McFague; her approach to theology was, at first, something I actually sympathised with! She’s in favour of the use of metaphor in theological discourse which, as those of you who are familiar with my theological position will know, I favour considerably! She also appears in favour of a stronger involvement by the Church to engage the population with [ecological] issues affecting the world², as well as the encouragement for the possibility of numerous models of God. It is this aspect of her work at which I begin to find flaws. Firstly and, perhaps a little nit-picky of me – it strikes me as hypocritical that she is in favour of allowing for multiple and simultaneously co-existent models of God, but yet comes from a feminist perspective and so without question, has a particular agenda of the promotion of her own model of God. The second point, which will be the focus of this article, is her criticism of the ‘deist’ model of God. I shall now discuss her critique of this model, as well as attempt to provide a coherent response and thus defence of deism, the model of God in which I place my belief. The first task at hand is to establish what is meant by ‘deism’. If you have read my previous article “Why God Exists” (2012) then you may already have an understanding of this term. If not, then let me refer to John Bowker’s Oxford Dictionary of World Religions, the book that has undoubtedly got me through 98% of my degree. Following the Enlightenment during the 18th Century, deism emerged as a view of God who “initiated creation and donated its laws, but then allowed it to pursue its own course”³. So put simply, God – in Aquinian and Aristotelian terms – is the first cause of everything; it is the primary causing agent of everything and after the original creation event, God’s interaction with the world on an immanent level ceased. Sallie McFague claims this view is “flat and uninteresting as well as non-Christian”⁴. The following discussion will deal with this claim. Coming from a liberal framework, I place emphasis on the use of reason when constructing any form of theology; theological enquiry has to be relevant and contextual, it has to make allowances for the knowledge of the world humans have attained through the means of scientific investigation and if needs be, any subsequently outdated theologies must either be rethought or in some cases, abandoned completely. Sallie McFague, at the beginning of her discussion of deism, acknowledges that this is a positive element of the deist model of God: The model has the advantage of freeing science […]http://sciphilos.info/docs_pages/images/deism.jpg