Concerning any evidence that a god may have given me.
If I were to think like that, if I were to start quoting the same kind of evidence that Christians have quoted to me so many times, I would have to deduce that Krishna was very much working to convince me of his divinity.
All well and good, but where does that place me with respect to Christianity? Some turn around an immediately say "Oh, that's a demon misleading you" - but then surely the same can be said back to them. Some may say "God was working around you, an alternate route Christianity via Hinduism" but that sounds so unlike what most Christians believe.
Whatever way you look at it, it makes these kind of evidence/experience arguments very weak. What can we trust? Maybe there are some fuzzy things we can take from it, but not the detail that the religious want.
Re: Paul Clarke and sceptics dissing evidence
If I were to think like that, if I were to start quoting the same kind of evidence that Christians have quoted to me so many times, I would have to deduce that Krishna was very much working to convince me of his divinity.
All well and good, but where does that place me with respect to Christianity? Some turn around an immediately say "Oh, that's a demon misleading you" - but then surely the same can be said back to them. Some may say "God was working around you, an alternate route Christianity via Hinduism" but that sounds so unlike what most Christians believe.
Whatever way you look at it, it makes these kind of evidence/experience arguments very weak. What can we trust? Maybe there are some fuzzy things we can take from it, but not the detail that the religious want.