A proper de jure objection to the epistemicrationality of religious belief

I answer Alvin Plantinga’s challenge to provide a ‘proper’ de jureobjection to religious belief. What I call the ‘sophisticates’ evidential objection’(SEO) concludes that sophisticated Christians lack epistemic justification forbelieving central Christian propositions. The SEO utilizes a theory of epistemicjustification in the spirit of the evidentialism of Richard Feldman and Earl Conee.I defend philosophical interest in the SEO (and its underlying evidentialism) againstobjections from Reformed epistemology, by addressing Plantinga’s criteria for aproper de jure objection, his anti-evidentialist arguments, and the relevance of‘impulsional evidence’. I argue that no result from Plantinga-style Reformedepistemology precludes the reasons I offer in favour of giving the SEO its duephilosophical attention