Argument for the Existence of God based on Religious Experience

What is a Religious Experience? Hardy ’ s criteria: Depth Change Knowledge Ineffability Heightened awareness Awe, joy, trust, bliss Sensory impressions – lights, voices

Other ideas Otto (1917) uses the ‘ numinous ’, a mysterious, wholly other, indefinable experience James ‘ the feelings, acts and experiences of individual men in their solitude, so far as they apprehend themselves to stand in relation to whatever they may consider the divine ”.

Mystical Experience “ the art of union with reality ” Underhill James 4 marks: Ineffability, Noetic Quality, Transiency, Passivity. Happold adds Timelessness, Unity and awareness of Inner Self. Famous mystics – Teresa of Avila, St John of the Cross, Julian of Norwich

Conversion Experience James says 2 types – gradual and sudden Starbuck calls these volitional and self- surrender Characteristics: change, illumination, memorable, rebirth, visions/voices, appreciation Sudden e.g. Saul -> St Paul Gradual e.g. Tolstoy, Bunyan

Prayer James: “ an intercourse with God ” 2 way interaction ACIPT – adoration, confession, intercession, petition and thanksgiving People think they are talking to God and act as if they are – does this prove God ’ s existence??

The Argument Direct Proof – no logic required, based on empirical evidence (or accounts of) Fits in with doctrine of revelation: “ an omnipotent and perfectly good creator will seek to interact with his creatures ” - Swinburne

Inductive Syllogism Peter Donovan If God exists, then religious experiences are likely to occur Religious experiences do occur. There are no better ways of explaining these experiences Therefore it is probable that God exists.

Swinburne ’ s Principles Credulity – “ how things seem to be is usually a good guide to how things are …” Testimony – “ In the absence of special consideration the experiences of others are probably as they report them ”. EXCEPT: unreliable perceptions (e.g. drugs) evidence against (e.g. person not there) Evidence that it is not caused by God

Weaknesses of argument People can change without God (Kierkegaard) Religion is just a social control and rel exp and illusion (Marx and Engels) Religion is a universal neurosis (Freud), rel exp an expression of neurotic behaviour. Rel Exps are caused by group dynamics of collective worship, a result of social conditions (Durkheim)

More weaknesses There are no agreed tests to verify a religious experience Lack of uniformity of experiences reported How can we rely on empirical evidence if God is not an empirical being? Strong emphasis on interpretation (Hare ’ s Bliks) Russell: “ we can make no distinction between the man who eats little and sees heaven and the man who drinks too much and sees snakes. ”

Some conclusions Caroline Franks Davies: Evidence for and against existence of God is equally balanced, but accounts of rel exps tips the balance in favour of his existence “ Even if it is possible to be mistaken, not all testimonies need be mistaken. ” Wittgenstein: “ If you question the testimony, where do you stop questioning? ”

Safe conclusion … Argument for the existence of God based on religious experience works better as a probability rather than a proof (which Swinburne and Donovan would have agreed with). Works as a proof for those who experience it directly (Dawkins).