An examination of some problems in religious epistemology

It is my intention in this thesis to decide whether or not it is reasonable to believe the claims of theism, (and since the only brand of theism with which I am acquainted is Christian theism the discussion will necessarily devolve upon that brand, which is what British Philosophers have always meant by theism anyway.) The question is important because of the importance of the beliefs in shaping the lives of men and communities, and since so many men base their conduct on an appeal to some kind of belief in God and since religion takes up so much of the resources of time and money of this community it is of interest to know whether belief in God is reasonable. If it is reasonable the effects are significant. If it is not, I think it is important to say that it is unreasonable. The question arises in the first place because of the preponderance of literature Which claims that no rational can or need be supplied for belief in God and because of the large number of people who hold their belief on non-rational, or irrational grounds. The following quotation from the article "Beginning all over again" by Howard Eugene Root in Soundings illustrates my aim. "At one time or another people are inclined to say reason can only take you so far. Reason is thereby likened to a railway line which takes one to a frontier station. There the line ends, where all have to get off the train. There are people about who tell us what the country is like on the other side of the frontier and it sounds very unlike what we know on this side. But this is where public conveyance ends. It is not even clear how we. can get to the other side. From the railway terminus we cannot see across the frontier. Do we go on foot? Some have tried this and never come back. Others have come back and reported that there is nothing on the other side at all. Still others have come back and made detailed reports. Yet how diverse and contradictory those reports seem. But what is the matter with the railway line? they not extend it beyond the frontier? If it can take us this far, why not a mile or so, further? How do we know that trains will not run over there until we have tried?" The requirements for intelligibility and verifiability will be foremost in the discussion and two possible theories will be considered in the search for a satisfactory epistemology: that based on the non-rational and that based on analogy with other minds. It is my intention to indicate, on the basis of the discussion, criteria which need to be met by any proposed religious epistemology for it to be acceptable and to indicate possible approaches to the problem of demonstrating that the assertions of theism are significant and verifiable