The insider/outsider debate, is essentially concerned with the problematic nature of representation. 'Insider' refers to a religious believer, an 'outsider' being someone who observes the behaviour of someone else. This collection of papers raises important questions regarding the nature of representing religions, it asks whether anyone can really understand the religious experience of someone else; or whether religion is something that must be experienced to be understood, as argued by Otto who terms it the 'numinous'. More importantly the question of who has the authority and power to represent what a religion is/means is debated. There are no concrete answers given here, its more of a methodological workout. Although obviously there can be bias from both an 'Insider', or an 'Outsiders' account of religion which leads to the question of whether a religion and all its diversity be adequately be represented at all without recourse to reductionism and misleading generalisations.