William James states that there are four main qualities of a religious experience. Ineffability, meaning it is impossible to express adequately in normal language. Noetic quality, meaning the experience gives the person an understanding of important truths, which could have not been reached without the experience. Transience, meaning that the experience is not long lasting – no more than a few hours – however the effect of the experience could last a life time and finally Passivity, meaning the person having the experience feels as through the experience is being controlled from outside themselves – they are the recipients of the experience rather than the instigators of it, thus convincing them that the experience comes from God. There have been examples of this, such as Debbie Santiango whose experience changed her life forever. Relating back to the question, surely if a religious experience includes these four main qualities, doesn’t this back up the argument for the existence of God? If someone experiences such things that changes their life, improves their understanding and is impossible to express successfully in normal language, this must mean that something with much more power has come in contact with them enabling them to these changes, that something being God. These qualities also cohere with the idea of an omnibenevolent deity, which connects with Richard Swimburns argument.
Richard Swinburne also believed that religious experience was reasonable as we should expect God to engage and interact with his creation, which would work with the belief that God is omnipotent and benevolent. Swinburne argues that we should trust those who give reports of religious experiences, because there is no reason to doubt them. He calls this the Principle of Testimony however he does admit that known liars and those influenced by drugs and other substances shouldn’t be trusted, but others, yes. He also mentions the Principle of Credulity, meaning that we should believe our senses and if it’s what it appears to be – it’s more than likely sure to be there so we should just believe what we see. Finally, for Swinburne, religious experience ‘tips the balance’ in favour of the existence of God.
In support of the above, The Religious Experience Research unit found that in 1969, 40% of people reported to have had a religious experience. Surely this large percentage proves that at least some of the reported experiences are in fact true? Also, religious experience works with the claims that the God of classical theism is omnibenevolent as he wants to communicate with his creation and he has the power to do so.
Carl Jung also offers an argument for the existence of God using religious experience. Jung believed that life has a spiritual purpose beyond material goals. He studied many religious such as Christianity and Buddhism and believed that this journey of transformation is at the heart of all religions. He also believed that it is a journey to meet the self and at the same time to meet the Divine. He stated that those who experienced a religious experience ‘posses a great treasure, a source of life and beauty that brings meaning to the world’
In conclusion, there appears to be a lot of evidence to suggest that religious experience offers a convincing argument for the existence of God. Religious experiences occur in all religions, from past to present, for example visions and apparitions being seen by St. Teresa of Avila in the 1535 and The Hindu Milk miracle which occurred in 1995, meaning that religious experience has reportedly occurred many times, in many different shapes. The fact that religious experience allows the receiver to gain knowledge, as James suggests also is a strength that the religious experience offers a convincing argument for the existence of God as many people may believe that only God has the power to offer such insight to people’s lives.. Also, the fact that religious experiences may be corporate may suggest that the validity of such claims increases, as many people may more than likely believe reports if more people claim the same thing like with the Toronto Blessing, where many people claimed to experience similar symptoms such as ‘stomach crunching’ and ‘laughter.’
(ii)However, many people may argue that religious experiences don’t actually offer a convincing argument for the existence of God. John Wisdom’s Parable of the Gardener demonstrates this interpretation difference. Wisdom’s story tells of two people who return to their neglected garden, and find, among the weeds, that a few of the old plants are surprisingly vigorous. One of the people says to the other, 'It must be that a gardener has been coming and doing something about these weeds.' The other disagrees and an argument begins. So, they both pitch their tents and watch for a gardener, however no gardener is ever seen. The believer of the two wonders if there is an invisible gardener, so they patrol with bloodhounds but the bloodhounds never show alert. However, the believer remains unconvinced, and insists that the gardener is invisible, has no scent and gives no sound. The sceptic doesn't agree, and asks how a so-called invisible, intangible, gardener differs from an imaginary gardener or even no gardener at all. This parable can be used to relate to the existence of God and religious experiences; if a believer’s statement about God can be made to fit any contextual situation – it is not meaningful and has no empirical implications. (Mention Ayer and Flew when we study them in the religious language topic)
On the other hand, religious experiences cannot be used fully for the ‘proof’ of the existence of God because most (not all) of these religious experiences are essentially private and cannot be tested by others – it is very difficult for anyone other than the receiver to understand what exactly happened during the experience, which is known as ineffable, and to know the exact extent to which the psychological implications the religious experience had on them.
Richard Dawkins tells a story from when he was younger, recalling that a friend was camping in Scotland and claimed to have heard ‘the voice of the devil.’ However, it was discovered that it was just the call of the ‘Manx Shearwater’ which has an evil sounding call. Dawkins believes that people are often ignorant of more straightforward physical or psychological explanations for what they perceive, and just jump to the conclusion that the answer is religious even though it may be able to be explained in other, more simple ways, so he believes that people are sometimes too ignorant, and they may only believe in religious experience because they are religious so it’s what they want to believe. He said ‘If we are gullible, we mistake dreams and hallucinations and believe we have seen an angel or God...but this does not mean that these are angels or Virgin Mary’s...’
William James also claims that some people are just too sceptical to ever believe in religious experiences and due to this trait, they will never be fully convinced, despite the evidence.
Freud is another scholar who is not quite convinced with religious experiences, he believed that religious experience can be explained in other terms, psychological terms. For example, you could look at someone who has experienced visions of Christ or another religious figure and relate it to those suffering with Schizophrenia (or other psychological illnesses) as a symptom of Schizophrenia in some people is hallucinations, so mental illnesses may be able to explain some of these apparent encounters with the divine. His psychological explanations come into major conflict with the strengths of the argument that religious experience offers a convincing argument for the existence of God. He also suggested the idea of a repressed sexuality and seeking a father figure relating to religious experience, saying that it is all psychologically related and are not actual encounters with the divine.
Finally, even though religious experiences may prove to be good for the receiver, changing their life forever, it doesn’t necessarily prove that God exists. Even though there are strengths which are mentioned above and the fact that it has apparently happened to atheists, there are also weaknesses that sceptics and others will always useagainst the statement that religious experience offers a convincing argument for the existence of God. Many people may argue against the idea of corporate experiences too. Even though the validity of a claim may be increased by the number of people who said it happened, sceptics may argue that the crowd effect could be in place – people may get carried away with one another causing them all to apparently experience the same thing, however in reality it is actually their influences making them see what apparently everyone else is seeing, supported by Lash’s quote ‘...in action and in discourse, we learn to see God’. It also depends on interpretation, people view different actions and events in different ways. Whilst a religious believer may learn to see God in everything that happens, a non-religious believer may dismiss this ‘religious experiences’ as just an experience in general.