Inner contradictions in the claim to experience God could invalidate the interpretation of the experience. Obviously the structure and maybe the validity of an Argument to God from Religious Experience will vary enormously according to what epistemological type of experience is taken as the starting point, and in the literature this is often hard to discern.
New logical problems appear at several points.
Not the most tempestuous sense of poetic inspiration can guarantee that a good poem is being brought to birth, nor can any of these conviction-experiences by itself authenticate its related judgments. I do not know how long I had sat there, when, all at once, I felt afraid.
Material objects, of course, are sometimes observed in unfavorable perceptual conditions—at a great distance, half-concealed, and so on.
Part of the difficulty is that most of the developed religions contain several strands in their conceptions of the divine. St Teresa of Avila described her experience of God: Experience and interpretation here advance in indissoluble unity.
This means it is impossible to say whether the existence of God could be proven without knowing whether God wants people to know it is real Castor The questions can be raised; why does God only appear to some people and not others?
The theist could insist that a much too crude notion of "interpretation" has so far been used, one that suggests, falsely, that there is a merely external and almost arbitrary relation between having and interpreting an experience.
The attempt to work out a coherent and systematic theological interpretation would be quite abandoned. Such variations do not, therefore, impugn the assertion that the object exists in the world external to us. Claim of religious experiences have been present throughout history but one of the most famous is the conversion of Saul on his way to Damascus.
I forgot everything, including time, as I sat there with those strange, beautiful creatures, surrounded by blue sky, sunshine, and sparkling sea.
Miracles are said to be acts that defy the laws of nature and go beyond anything that is possible by humanity. There seems no way, at the experiential level, of settling the really urgent questions, most of all the following: On this it is extremely hard to give any confident answer.
It even caused talking in tongues glossolalia.
Let us take into consideration the observation of a jogger with a yellow lycra top on, now it would be perfectly acceptable to conclude from this observation that a jogger wearing a yellow lycra top does indeed exist.
It is an a-posterior argument, so relies on evidence from the individual or group of individuals for back-up. A second familiar objection is that although we certainly do have religious experience, we cannot employ it as the premise of an argument to God.RELIGIOUS EXPERIENCE, ARGUMENT FOR THE EXISTENCE OF GOD Arguments from Religious Experience show remarkable diversity, (a) in the sorts of experience taken as data for the argument, (b) in the structure of the inference itself, and (c) in the alleged conclusion, whether to a vague Presence, an Infinite Being, or the God of traditional.
Feb 04, · For religious believers, the occurrence of these experiences is the most convincing evidence/proof for the existence of God.
A key concept that is associated with religious experiences is that they are essentially personal and unique; usually arguing that God manifests Himself in some way to make his presence known in the. The argument from religious experience is the argument that personal religious experiences can prove God’s existence to those that have them.
One can only perceive that which exists, and so God must exist because there. Existence of God Essay. Descartes states two arguments attempting to prove God's existence, the Trademark argument and the traditional Cosmological argument.
Although his arguments are strong and relatively truthful, they do no prove the existence of God. Analyse the Argument of the Existence of God from Religious Experience;.
Furthermore, from a religious perspective, (some) religious believers may argue that there is no need for religious experience to prove that God exists because we should easily be able to determine that God exists.
Atheists cannot use inaccuracies in holy books as proof that God does not exist, as it is possible that such a god exists who has never been mentioned in religious texts. This means it is impossible to say whether the existence of God could be proven without knowing whether God wants people to know it is real (Castor 45).