Christopher Hitchens - The difference between Deism and Theism

I can also be found on Twitter @_Four_Horsemen

Christopher Hitchens debates with Conservative Jewish leader Rabbi David J. Wolpe, presented by Harvard Book Store, March 2010.

[sammysam]

I'm not an expert in any belief or lack of. I am not an agnostic, but it makes more sense. Neither theists and subsets or atheists and subsets cannot prove their claims or beliefs. But even though one cannot show proof, doesn't make it wrong.
If I picked any belief system, Deism would be it. Two reasons
1: Creation of the universe.
2: Does not intervene/separate (free will)
Just my opinion. I have no proof regardless

[NavaidSyed]

Einstein and Darwin never denied first cause.

[spawncampe]

I'm kind of an agnostic when it comes to a deistic god. I'm a total nonbeliever when it comes to religion or theistic gods but I don't think anyone can ultimately claim there is or isn't a deistic god

[chuckinchina]

I've found that the Daoists seem to have the most balanced (lol) take on the issue, Spinoza would be a good example from the west. As technology and science advance, we'll get a better picture, but we still won't understand. It's impossible to comprehend. It just is.

[littledoggy]

Darwin didn't overthrow deism. And Hitchens was wildly out of his element on the subject.

[garyellis]

We don’t know is the only way to respond. And we certainly don’t have any evidence of a God as described by any religion. Period. At best we have theories.

[ok]

surely before 1st mover, addressing something comeing from nothing is more important.

[SuperGuirro]

And I used to think that this guy was very smart. He's just a good orator, lmao.

[DetectiveRyku]

What am i? I am little bit deist and little bit theist.

[JoeBuck-ucbl]

Deism vs atheism vs pantheism seems like just semantics.

[GeekFurious]

I have no problem with deists outside of their inability to prove there is a god.

[michelangelope]

If the obvious truth is not wanted to be understood having to admit to be wrong it is impossible to change a mind. Nothing can be created from nothing and if everything needed to be created or have a beginning of existence nothing would exist in an infinite regress of causes and effects without a beginning of existence. The son can not exist without the parents that can not exist without the grandparents ad infinitum without a beginning of existence. What is the logical conclusion? That an eternal reality exists. An eternal entity is not the same as an eternal sequence of causes and effects or reality known as "the universe". Why the eternal entity is God? Because created everything that has a beginning of existence or mortality. Religious people understand what atheists reject as all kind of fallacies. Someone is lying because we all have the same understanding of logic. Can an atheist admit that God exists even if its nature is not known, like it is possible to admit that a theft has been committed without knowing the identity of the thief? It is impossible. A contradiction is an impossibility and a miracle is an impossibility that God makes possible, an act of God.