As a Deist and member of several Deists sites and communities, I think Rich Deem's "Why Deism Fails as a Philosophical Paradigm of the Universe" misrepresents Deism. You can read the original article at the "God and Science" website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/deism.html).

Introduction

The deist concludes that God is not all-powerful - God is unable to interact with His creation, but is limited by the laws of physics. The theist says that God is all-powerful, but chooses to limit the extent of His intervention into the day-to-day workings of the universe. Which paradigm makes more sense? (Deem)

There is no dogmatic rule in Deism claiming that God is unable to interact with the Creation. In fact, many believe God does interact with the universe – take a look at Pandeism and Panendeism for example. The issue is not interaction, defined as experiential knowledge of the universe and its inhabitants, but interference. The majority of Deists have concluded there is no evidence for God's interference in the natural order of the universe.

Deism based solely upon reason?

However, the central tenet of deism - that God does not interact with his creation - is a philosophical assumption that has no basis in the facts. In fact, most Christians will testify that God personally interacts with them through prayer. Although it is theoretically possible that millions of Christians are deluded in this belief, it doesn't seem likely. (Deem)

To allow us to compare apples to apples, let us agree by "interact" you are referring to what the Deist terms as "interfere." The Deist conclusion that God does not interfere is not based on a philosophical assumption, but observation of nature. Aside from unsubstantiated miracles heralded in holy books or personal (albeit not provable) conviction, on what hard evidence do Theists base their conclusion that God interferes in the operation of the universe or the affairs of humanity?

The second part of your paragraph is troubling because it opens the door for groupthink rather than reason. Islam is on track to overtake Christianity in overall numbers. Will you make the same argument for the millions of Muslims who enforce Allah's rules upon Christians? How can you prove they are deluded, while the Christian is not? The Bible is no more authoritative than the Koran, and that is precisely why the Deist does not turn to holy books to evaluate the claims of revealed religions.

God's omnipotence

Theism says that God is omnipotent. However, omnipotence does not mean that God can do anything. God cannot do anything that is logically impossible. Otherwise logic would be illogical. Likewise, God cannot do anything that contradicts His nature. If He did so, He would cease to be God. Omnipotence means that God can do anything that He sets out to do, and nothing is impossible for God to accomplish that He wishes to do. This is the true definition of omnipotence (see Can God Truly Be Omnipotent? for more information). Theism says that God is not limited by the laws of physics, but can break those laws at any time. However, the universe is designed to operate without continuous intervention by God. God seems to limit His intervention in the universe to creation miracles and miracles that demonstrate His power and love. I am the recipient of one of God's healing miracles, so I am know that God is personally involved in the universe.

You state that: "Theism says that God is omnipotent. However, omnipotence does not mean that God can do anything." Four sentences later you state: "Omnipotence means that God can do anything that He sets out to do, and nothing is impossible for God to accomplish that He wishes to do." You simply cannot place limits upon God, then remove those limits and present this as a credible position. The dictionary definition of omnipotent is "having unlimited power; able to do anything."

You said "Within three months all symptoms of Crohn's disease had disappeared," but we know that "once the disease begins, it tends to fluctuate between periods of inactivity (remission) and activity (relapse)." (http://www.medicinenet.com/crohns_disease/article.htm) My aunt also thought she was healed by a preacher (Mario Murillo). Her symptoms were gone for a years, but they eventually returned. Whose experience was real, yours or my aunt's? She was just as convicted as you. Remission of pain and disease happens as part of the natural order of things and is not necessarily an indicator of divine intervention. In fact, it is your personal feelings that define it as such, not the facts alone.

In Reasoned Spirituality, we hold that "human beings are capable of having profound experiences of God, but hold that such personal revelations are true only for themselves."

Implications for the absence of evil

You believe the "presence of evil in the universe serves several purposes for our benefit, and to fulfill the purposes God has for the universe." Really? Are you saying that child molestation, murder, and abuse serve a purpose in God's divine plan? How, exactly, do you equate that to a loving God who interferes in the universe to help you with an intestinal disorder but not help an innocent child being brutally raped?

Most Deists conclude that evil is the result of human choices and actions, not the result of demonic agents tempting us. So why does the Creator allow for the existence of evil? The logical choice is to conclude that evil is the necessary by-product of free will. Further, Absolute free will necessitates God's complete impartiality. It is important to note that impartiality does not equal indifference, either. The implication being that the Creator has placed the burden squarely on humanity's shoulders to treat each other with compassion.

Deistic god is stupid and/or cruel

You open with the claim that: "According to deism, God is restricted by the laws of the universe." I have already explained that this claim is untrue. In fact, the majority of Deists have concluded, "God does not act in the universe in ways that contradict natural law, but do not deny the possibility." On this point alone, the remainder of your argument is moot.

The purpose of the universe according to deism

You state: "The purpose for the existence of the universe is the ultimate downfall of deism. If God is not in control, the universe has no purpose and God created the universe for no particular purpose other than to watch its inhabitants suffer."

In Pandeism and Panendeism, God is literally part of the universe. Absolutely everything that happens God will know experientially – the pleasures and the pains. Why are billions of people living in poverty, starving, and subjected to unimaginable atrocities today - right now? Why doesn't the "loving" God of Christianity put an end to it all? Why does He seem to do nothing more than watch?

Which truly makes more sense? (1) The Creator has put the responsibility on us to grow spiritually, to learn what true love and compassion are for ourselves and to make them a reality; or, (2) The "loving" God of theism just lets it happen so he can punish us forever, knowing we only have partial information and the span of our lives is a blink of the eye in comparison to eternity?

Finally, you say the "universe is accelerating in its expansion. In a few hundred billion years, the expansion will be so rapid that galaxies will be unable to exist. Eventually, all matter will be ripped apart and the universe will become completely cold and dead. So much for the "loving" god of deism and his ultimate design for the "perfect" universe." Science does not yet have consensus on the future of the universe, especially given our incredibly limited understanding of dark energy and dark matter. You present the future of the universe as if it is known quantity to humanity. It simply is not.

The purpose of the universe according to theism

Let's address some of your key points:

"So, the most important purpose of the universe is as a place in which spiritual creatures can make the choice to love or reject God."

So for the overwhelming history of humanity, the God of theism never undeniably revealed himself. When He supposedly did, it was only to select prophets. If that were the true purpose of the universe, then one would think God would personally brief each of us on the choice we face. Aside from your personal feelings, you have absolutely no proof that the Bible is any truer than the Koran or Torah. You have no proof that your conception of a Theistic God is any truer than Buddhism or Hinduism, again save your personal conviction that it is so. Thus, you cannot claim that the "choice" we allegedly face is actually correct because the New Testament says so.

"Those who choose God are encouraged to do good works to help other people make the same choice. So, evil is opposed by those who love God."

Deists, atheists, and billions of other non-Theistic believers oppose human evil.

The Theistic God is not only looking for you to do good works, but to worship him as well. That sounds more like the egotistical requirement of a human dictator than a Creator God. Why would God, with all that love and power, need human beings to worship him? It defies logic. If you say God does not "need" it, then why threaten eternal damnation if we do not give it?

"If there were no evil, the universe would have no purpose, choice would not be possible, and good deeds would not be possible."

If God wanted a bunch of lemmings that just loved Him unconditionally, he could have created mindless souls to follow him around like a gaggle of groupies. The idea of creating human beings, giving them the power of reason but no credible information regarding His expectations, and then doling out eternal damnation for failing to meet those same expectations seems equally ridiculous.

Conclusion

If we examine the universe and the history of humanity with an unbiased view, we conclude that the Creator seems impartial, vice indifferent, because the latter requires us to make a subjective judgment for which we do not have enough information.

So what is the common thread across all sentient lifetimes? Experience and Choice. Every human being experiences life: love, hate, fear, joy, etc. Choice allows all human beings to mold themselves through knowledge, experience, and action – an act of self-creation in a sense.

Rather than facing accountability in some afterlife, we are held accountable in this life for our actions through suffering – an understanding figured out by Buddha long before Christ showed up to suffer the cross on behalf of humanity.