This is what I object to about Caitlin's analysis in this piece. It is unequivocally untrue to say there is no such thing as truth.

Is she saying that? Neither of the quoted statements imply that there is no such thing as Truth, and I can't find such a thought in the context. You seem to have read a lot of her stuff, would you really say this is a representative statement that she does not hold that there is such a thing as 'Truth'? I'm not speaking for her, but posts by CJ such as this or even this suggest to me that it so. But 'Truth' is also a bugger to define in words and concepts, I think that she also conveys this ineffable 'aspect' of Truth in her writings, many of which I personally find to contain a deep spirituality that resonates well!

As a side note, I didn't identify myself as a "staunch atheist" but a "staunch agnostic", and I absolutely reject the idea that my experience had anything to do with my "own divine nature". The experience I had was with the divine, and the divine was absolutely distinct and separate from myself.

Apologies the mixing up of agnostic/aethiest - these are indeed very distinct, I wasn't paying attention. Unconditional acceptance of your experience as you say it and your position as you state it. I guess I was projecting my own view, for this is what seems to have been the case :).