This article deals with the critique of the epistemic justification of faith by means of private religious evidence exposed by R. Bělohrad. Bělohrad"s foundationalism and the concept of epistemic duty is confronted with the principle of credulity proposed by R. Swinburne. Swinburne´s classification of religious experience is discussed and criticised. The nature of authority and its justification is briefly discussed. Theism is shown as a prima facie legitimate hypothesis and an atheist as the one on whom side the burden of proof is. If such proof is absent atheist is epistemically bound to open himself to religious experience.

Keywords: justification of faith, epistemology, religious experience, theism, atheism, epistemic duty, God, man, cow, cat, griffin and platypus