Abstract The secondary literature on religious epistemology has focused extensively on whether religious experience can provide evidence for God’s existence. In this article, I suppose that religious experience can do this, but I consider whether it can provide adequate evidence for justified belief in God. I argue that it can. This requires a couple of moves. First, I consider the threshold problem for evidentialism and explain pragmatic encroachment (PE) as a solution to it. Second, I argue that religious experience can justify belief in God if one adopts PE, but this poses a dilemma for the defender of the veridicality of religious experience. If PE is true, then whether S has a justified belief in God on the basis of religious experience depends on how high the stakes are for having an experience with God. This requires one to determine whether the stakes are high or low for experiencing God, which puts the experient of God in an awkward position. If the stakes are not high, then justified belief in God on the basis of religious experience will be easier to come by, but this requires conceding that experiencing God is not that important. If the stakes are high, then the experient can maintain the importance of experience with God but must concede that justified belief in God on the basis of experience with God is less likely to happen, perhaps impossible.

中文翻译：

---

宗教经历，务实侵犯和对上帝的公义信仰

摘要宗教认识论的辅助文献广泛地关注了宗教经验是否可以为上帝的存在提供证据。在本文中，我认为宗教经验可以做到这一点，但是我认为它是否可以提供充分的证据证明对上帝的合理信仰。我认为可以。这需要一些动作。首先，我考虑了证据主义的门槛问题，并解释了实用主义的侵犯（PE）作为对此的解决方案。其次，我认为如果一个人采用体育教育，宗教经验就可以证明对上帝的信仰是合理的，但这为宗教经验的真实性辩护者带来了困境。如果PE是真的，那么S是否基于宗教经验对上帝有正当的信仰，取决于与上帝经验的赌注有多高。这就需要确定对于体验上帝而言，赌注是高还是低，这使上帝的经验者处于尴尬的境地。如果赌注不高，那么基于宗教经验对上帝的合理信仰将更容易实现，但这需要承认体验上帝并不那么重要。如果风险很高，那么经验丰富的人就可以保持与上帝的经验的重要性，但是必须承认，基于与上帝的经验基础上对上帝的合理信仰不太可能发生，也许是不可能的。