Reliability of divine intuition as a properly basic belief

Define the thesis precisely as a claim about reliability of divine intuition yielding properly basic belief.

Identify assumptions (faculty reliability) and key terms (properly basic, divine intuition).

Specify evidence targets: descriptions of religious experience and Reformed epistemology.

Gather primary sources: SEP entries on religious experience and epistemology, Wikipedia on epistemology.

Extract relevant claims: religious experiences seem like objective reality; not all feelings count; Reformed epistemology noted.

Evaluate source reliability: Stanford Encyclopedia is scholarly; Wikipedia is secondary but acceptable for background.

Construct supporting argument linking reliable faculty and proper basicality.

Construct opposing argument emphasizing misidentification and lack of reliability evidence.

Test logical structure: both arguments hinge on unverified reliability assumption.

Compare competing explanations: hiddenness as autonomy vs. naturalistic accounts.

Record unresolved issues: empirical assessment of faculty reliability remains absent.

Produce the current assessment: claim remains contested.