First 476 words of the document:
Lack of Evidence Conflicting Claims
Lacks of evidence showing Similarities between the effects of experiences, but
religious experiences have differences in description of experiences.
happened, beyond what a Religious experiences are ineffable; if Hindus and Christians
person says. Religious have different religious experiences, this may be explained
experiences claim to alter a by prior beliefs. The only language that can be used to
person's behaviour, but this attempt to communicate an ineffable experience is drawn
only shows a person has from the person's culture and upbringing: the language and
changed, it does not give any thought world for Christianity is a Christian, and for
insight into the origins or Hinduism, Hindu.
nature of religious experience. Product of human psychology; they only reflect prior beliefs.
David Hume's argument of conflicting miracles in different
religions cancelling each other out.
Conclusion; Do religious experiences demonstrate the existence of God?
People who have religious experiences are no more likely than others to be deluded,
ignorant or to misinterpret the world. Nor is it the case that only ignorant people
have religious experiences.
The large number of people claiming to have experienced religious experiences
suggests God does exist
Some philosophers say, that taken with other arguments for god's existence, religious
experience suggests that it is likely that God exists. Swinburne; `existence,
orderliness, and fine tunedness of the world...conscience...apparent experience by
millions of his presence, all make it significantly more probable that not that there is a
James; authority of religious experience does not extend beyond the person who
experiences it; in this sense a philosophical demonstration of God's existence is based
on religious experience is not possible.
Part of the problem is that whether one believes that religious experiences happen
depends very much on their prior beliefs. If you believe in God, it is rational to believe
someone has had a religious experience, if you do not, then it is rational to claim they
have not. Swinburne suggests we should believe it, unless there is good reason not
Origins of religious experience maybe psychological or sociological, in which case they
may have significant meaning to the person who has the experience, even though
they do not support an argument for the existence of God. There are beneficial
effects such as conversion; a better sense of well being and why you are here. A
psychological experience also in no way excludes God, since he is the creator and the
sustainers of creation; in this view there is nothing more natural than people
experiencing God through natural means that are God's own creation.