Religious Experience
What is a Religious Experience?
An out-of-the-ordinary experience with God or a religious figure, known as
the Ultimate.
Transcendent and can occur both personally and corporately. (Examples:
conversion, mystical, possession, elation)
Recipients say they have a deeper understanding of God/Higher Power
afterwards, so it changes people to an extent.
Example: 1987 David Hay to the British public “Have you been influenced by a
presence or power, different from your everyday?” 48% answered yes.
RE as proof of God’s existence
Other religious experiences can be interpreted as subjective interpretation
of reality in a religious, objective framework. (Examples: prayer,
pilgrimage, fasting)
Inductive, a posteriori argument for the existence of God. Follows premise:
1. If an entity is experienced, it must exist
2. God is the sort of being that is possible to experience
3. People claim to have experienced God directly
It has HISTORICAL, MEDICAL AND ACCUMULATIVE evidence
The RE proves God wants a relationship with us
Proves God is omnipotent and omniscient
Objective view: God is independent, and we interact with him. Could be
evidence for his existence
Subjective: Purely interpreted as God personally. Less evidential.
Swinburne and Testimony
Is there a God (1996)
God desires to interact with us, and this fits his attributes of benevolence
and omnipotence
If there are Res, God exists
Principle of Testimony
“In the absence of special considerations, the experiences of others are
as reported”
We should believe the testimony, unless there is exceptional
circumstances
Principle of Credulity
The “overwhelming testimony” “tips the balance” of the argument that
God exists
It is Rational to believe the number of testimonies.
We should trust Intuition
CRIT: Where is the tangible proof!
RESP: If we experience something, we tend to assume it is true. How is
different from anyone else’s view
, Support for Swinburne
Brian Davies:
Vouches for Pro-Inductive argument.
“We need to work on the assumption” otherwise it will be difficult to
establish anything at all
Ockham’s Razor:
Supports fewest assumptions:
Swinburne trusts the assumptions to prove God exists, the Razor supports
this
Criticism of Swinburne
The religious experience is not like other testimonies; there is a bigger
likelihood of erroring observations when working with something so vague
God is not definable as a testimony
Are people really trustworthy in testimony?
Sincerity of belief should not be credible for everyone. Just because
sincere Nazi’s exist does not mean I should believe their views— “Problem
of other minds”
Historical argument for existence of God
Probable proof by those who had an experience exists forever
CRIT: Too subjective and ambiguous
CRIT: Different interpretations of God rule each other out.
Cumulative argument for Existence of God
Sheer weight of different arguments tips it in favour
CRIT: Hume argues that all miracles have only been viewed by one person
at a time
Corporate experiences (Mystical and Conversion)
Religious experiences as a collective
Perceptions are still individual
Toronto Blessing: People felt the Holy Spirit as a presence, and began
feeling mass “holy laughter”
Bosnian Six: Six children in a small village saw Marian apparitions,
attracting pilgrims to the village.
Biblical story of Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit
Criticism of Corporate experiences
Mass hysteria is a well-recognised phenomena; it could be mistaken as a
RE
Many believed that the work of the Toronto blessing was that of the Devil,
not the Holy Spirit
Why would God choose to reveal himself in this way when he was always
canonically spoken to one person at a time?
Why would God choose this type of interaction over anything else? The
Toronto blessing only made fools of those involved.
What is a Religious Experience?
An out-of-the-ordinary experience with God or a religious figure, known as
the Ultimate.
Transcendent and can occur both personally and corporately. (Examples:
conversion, mystical, possession, elation)
Recipients say they have a deeper understanding of God/Higher Power
afterwards, so it changes people to an extent.
Example: 1987 David Hay to the British public “Have you been influenced by a
presence or power, different from your everyday?” 48% answered yes.
RE as proof of God’s existence
Other religious experiences can be interpreted as subjective interpretation
of reality in a religious, objective framework. (Examples: prayer,
pilgrimage, fasting)
Inductive, a posteriori argument for the existence of God. Follows premise:
1. If an entity is experienced, it must exist
2. God is the sort of being that is possible to experience
3. People claim to have experienced God directly
It has HISTORICAL, MEDICAL AND ACCUMULATIVE evidence
The RE proves God wants a relationship with us
Proves God is omnipotent and omniscient
Objective view: God is independent, and we interact with him. Could be
evidence for his existence
Subjective: Purely interpreted as God personally. Less evidential.
Swinburne and Testimony
Is there a God (1996)
God desires to interact with us, and this fits his attributes of benevolence
and omnipotence
If there are Res, God exists
Principle of Testimony
“In the absence of special considerations, the experiences of others are
as reported”
We should believe the testimony, unless there is exceptional
circumstances
Principle of Credulity
The “overwhelming testimony” “tips the balance” of the argument that
God exists
It is Rational to believe the number of testimonies.
We should trust Intuition
CRIT: Where is the tangible proof!
RESP: If we experience something, we tend to assume it is true. How is
different from anyone else’s view
, Support for Swinburne
Brian Davies:
Vouches for Pro-Inductive argument.
“We need to work on the assumption” otherwise it will be difficult to
establish anything at all
Ockham’s Razor:
Supports fewest assumptions:
Swinburne trusts the assumptions to prove God exists, the Razor supports
this
Criticism of Swinburne
The religious experience is not like other testimonies; there is a bigger
likelihood of erroring observations when working with something so vague
God is not definable as a testimony
Are people really trustworthy in testimony?
Sincerity of belief should not be credible for everyone. Just because
sincere Nazi’s exist does not mean I should believe their views— “Problem
of other minds”
Historical argument for existence of God
Probable proof by those who had an experience exists forever
CRIT: Too subjective and ambiguous
CRIT: Different interpretations of God rule each other out.
Cumulative argument for Existence of God
Sheer weight of different arguments tips it in favour
CRIT: Hume argues that all miracles have only been viewed by one person
at a time
Corporate experiences (Mystical and Conversion)
Religious experiences as a collective
Perceptions are still individual
Toronto Blessing: People felt the Holy Spirit as a presence, and began
feeling mass “holy laughter”
Bosnian Six: Six children in a small village saw Marian apparitions,
attracting pilgrims to the village.
Biblical story of Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit
Criticism of Corporate experiences
Mass hysteria is a well-recognised phenomena; it could be mistaken as a
RE
Many believed that the work of the Toronto blessing was that of the Devil,
not the Holy Spirit
Why would God choose to reveal himself in this way when he was always
canonically spoken to one person at a time?
Why would God choose this type of interaction over anything else? The
Toronto blessing only made fools of those involved.
