Oh my. Now I see that you edited one of your comments after I posted. Were you going to tell me?
"I refuse to engage on your terms especially when you're being so hypocritical: although you expect me to back up my assertions with arguments, this standard somehow doesn't apply to you."
Well, now you don't have that excuse, do you? I responded in the other thread.
It is not about backing up assertions with arguments, cutup. I did back up myself. "sure way to know that God exists" contrasted with "this is not an arguemnt for God's existence." That's backing it up. And what did you say? Did you say, "Oh well, no, he didn't mean his argument isn't for God's existence when he said this isn't an argument for God's existence"? No, because that would be stupid. Instead, you redirected and in the face of that example you returned to your demand that by experiential Craig means prayer, which is an entirely different matter and which I attacked on different grounds.
I met your standard. I beat you on that standard. Now MAN up, big talker. Man up.