43%
Confidence
Belief overview
Relativização da revelação especial
Revelações particulares não são tratadas como base necessária ou universal da religião.
2
Supportive
2
Contrary
0
Neutral
O que é: O deísmo geralmente questiona a necessidade de revelações especiais exclusivas para conhecer a verdade religiosa fundamental.
Como a posição entende: Se Deus é racional e o mundo é inteligível, então verdades religiosas básicas deveriam ser acessíveis de modo universal, e não depender apenas de tradições particulares, profetas específicos ou textos exclusivos.
Base e contexto: O tema surge em crítica bíblica, polêmicas entre confissões e filosofia iluminista.
Debates e variações: Alguns deístas rejeitam revelação especial por completo; outros aceitam algum valor moral ou histórico, mas não autoridade absoluta.
Documentary evidence
Supportive
Matthew Tindal, Christianity as Old as the Creation
A central work of English deism on religion as old as creation.
Reference: Matthew Tindal, Christianity as Old as the Creation.
Content: Tindal argues that true religion is as old as creation and accessible to reason, not dependent on exclusive late revelations.
Use in debate: It is one of the most important classical formulations of deistic natural religion.
Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason
A popular defense of deism and a critique of biblical revelation.
Reference: Thomas Paine, The Age of Reason.
Content: Paine affirms belief in God and criticizes revealed scriptures as a basis of infallible authority.
Use in debate: It is a central source for criticism of special revelation and for the public defense of deism.
Contrary
Blaise Pascal, Pensées
A classic criticism of the sufficiency of abstract religious reason.
Reference: Blaise Pascal, Pensées.
Content: Pascal criticizes the God of the philosophers as insufficient and emphasizes revelation, grace, and a deeper existential encounter.
Use in debate: It is a classic source against rationalist deism.
Hebrews 1:1-2
A text about decisive revelation through the Son.
Reference: Hebrews 1:1-2.
Content: The passage states that God spoke in many ways and finally through the Son.
Use in debate: It is used by Christian traditions to defend special revelation against deism.