Changes

In its weaker form, the argument asserts only that religious experiences constitute [[evidence]] for God’s existence.

In its weaker form, the argument asserts only that religious experiences constitute [[evidence]] for God’s existence.

Unless there is some specific reason to question the validity of a religious experience, most people will accept that religious experience is at least ''[[prima facie]]'' evidence for the existence of God, and as support for the philosophical [[hypothesis]] of [[theism]].

Unless there is some specific reason to question the validity of a religious experience, most people will accept that religious experience is at least ''[[prima facie]]'' (Latin, "at first view") evidence for the existence of God, and as support for the philosophical [[hypothesis]] of [[theism]].

Most religious people do not defend their beliefs using any philosophical [[rhetoric]] at all. Most people will defend their religious belief based upon their own experiences and what they regard as the reliable testimony of others as evidence for the existence of God, such as the historical accounts of encounters with God in the Christian [[Bible]] and the uninterrupted existence and growth of [[Christianity]].  

Most religious people do not defend their beliefs using any philosophical [[rhetoric]] at all. Most people will defend their religious belief based upon their own experiences and what they regard as the reliable testimony of others as evidence for the existence of God, such as the historical accounts of encounters with God in the Christian [[Bible]] and the uninterrupted existence and growth of [[Christianity]].

== Historical testimonies: epistemological reliability ==

== Historical testimonies: epistemological reliability ==