As to the theism-atheism debate. I pronounce it a draw before the debate. Both sides are intellectually reasonable. If G-d is there, then G-d leaves a very light footprint on the world. However, I will try to get to the debate and assess the skill of the antipodal debater!

“In religious debate, believers get the enemies they deserve. When salt loses its savor, only the insipid will bother to reply, or even to notice.”

Though I don’t think I agree with Oakes on what constitutes saltiness. I imagine he thinks it’s orthodoxy. I think it’s the imitation of Christ. The discussion there (including Nietzsche) is unbalanced toward overvaluing intellectualism; it’s still a good discussion. I also still think some of the best criticism of Christianity comes from within and that the internal criticism can make substantial progress. The psyche builds a wall toward outsiders and outsiders are less likely to understand what the religious language means.