The Deists believe in a God, but reject a written revelation from him. They are extravagant in their encomiums on natural religion, though they differ much respecting its nature, extent, obligation, and importance. Dr. Clarke, in his treatise on Deism, divides them into four classes, according to the number of articles comprised in their creed.

The first are such as pretend to believe the existence of in eternal, infinite, independent, intelligent Being, and who, to avoid the name of Epicurean Atheists, teach also that this Supreme Being made the world; though, at the same time, they agree with the Epicureans in this -- that they fancy God does not at all concern himself in the government of the world, nor has any regard to, or care of, what is done therein.

The second sort of Deists are those who believe not only the being, but also the providence, of God, with respect to the natural world, but who, not allowing any difference between moral good and evil, deny that God takes any notice of the morally good or evil actions of men; these things depending, as they imagine, on the arbitrary constitution of human laws.

A third sort of Deists there are, who, having right apprehensions concerning the natural attributes of God and his all-governing providence, and some notion of his moral perfections also, yet, being prejudiced against the notion of the immortality of the soul, believe that men perish entirely at death, and that one generation shall perpetually succeed another, without any further restoration or renovation of things.

A fourth and last sort of Deist are such as believe the existence of a Supreme Being, together with his providence in the government of the world; also all the obligations of natural religion, but so far only as these things are discoverable by the light of nature alone, without believing any divine revelation.

These, the learned author observes, are the only true Deists; but, as their principles would naturally lead them to embrace the Christian revelation, he concludes there is now no consistent scheme of Deism in the world. Dr. Clarke then adds, "The heathen philosophers -- those few of them who taught and lived up to the obligations of natural religion -- had, indeed, a consistent scheme of Deism, as far as it went. But the case is not so now; the same scheme is not any longer consistent with its own principles; it does not now lead men to embrace revelation, as it then taught them to hope for it. Deists in our days, who reject revelation when offered to them, are not such men as Socrates and Cicero were; but, under pretence of Deism, it is plain they are generally ridiculers of all that is truly excellent in natural religion itself. Their trivial and vain cavils; their mocking and ridiculing without and before examination; their directing the whole stress of objections against particular customs, or particular and perhaps uncertain opinions or explications of opinions, without at all considering the main body of religion; their loose, vain, and frothy discourses; and, above all, their vicious and immoral lives, -- show, plainly and undeniably, that they are not real Deists, but mere Atheists, and, consequently, not capable to judge of the truth of Christianity."

Dr. Paley observes, "Of what a revelation discloses to mankind, one, and only one, question can be properly asked. -- Was it of importance to mankind to know or to be better assured of? In this question, when we turn our thoughts to the great Christian doctrine of a resurrection from the dead and a future judgment, no doubt can be possibly entertained. He who gives me riches or honors does nothing; he who even gives me health, does little in comparison with that which lays before me just grounds for expecting a restoration to life, and a day of account and retribution, which thing Christianity hath done for millions."