Er..I know I did have a divine experience. The divine made it so that I know it was divine. Can we agree that the divine (as classically defined: omnipotent and all that) can rearrange whatever it is in me that "knows" or "knows not" into "I know"*.
*lets suppose "molecular arrangement of some portion of my mind" for the sake of argument
No, not unless you can present what those changes are and how they can be tested.
You keep moving the goal posts and trying to palm the pea. The question is not what God can do, it is how someone can determine if an experience is divine or not.
I'm not asking you to believe me. I'm just saying that your knowing suffers from the same problems as does mine - when it comes to demonstrating itself absolutely
Of course, that's not true, and you have had this explained to you many times. There are many ways to externally validate someone's existence and the fact that they are participating in an internet discussion.
These "many ways" of yours all involve the bald assumption that the tools used to demonstrate someone elses existance themselves exist. You mean to tell me you can't see the circularity of your argument? This is it: "I assume this tool to exist and I apply this assumed tool to demonstrate the existance of something who existance I am attempting to demonstrate"
Your knowing these tools exist doesn't mean they do Schraf - that's elemental. You seem to have a hard time admitting that you do precisely as I do - you assume your knowing certain things exist means they do. You assume that what you perceive to be real is real and move on to apply these perceived tools to particular perceived jobs which you also assume to be real.
Your general error is to forget that your argument has to attach to something concrete at the end. And there is nothing concrete at the end. Your structure is built on a foundation called Your Assumptions About The Nature Of Reality. Just as mine is.
The two claims are not at all identical.
The foundations are indeed identical. The structures each of us build will depend upon what we perceive the reality to be. But its the foundation that's important.
It is done by the divine to the person. And if done by the divine the person knows it is the divine. They know it because of the ability of the divine to instill the sense we call "knowing".
If they know it, "How do they know that it is divine or non-divine." You still have simply avoided the question.
I don't believe I have. You seem to be labouring under the notion that the divine is not able to demonstrate his divinity.
Which would be foolish in the extreme. If we are to suppose that "knowing" is a particular arrangement of braincells (that differs to the arrangement of brain cells called "suspect that") then it doesn't take a major leap to suppose that the divine can ensure brain cells take on the arrangement call "knowing it is the divine"
How do I know? Because the divine made it so. How else do you suppose it could happen in not thus.