Your points are well made, however, there is no need for a believer to substantiate his doctrine with materialistic theory.
Not so however with the atheist - who as a metaphysical naturalist has put materialism at the center of his disbelief - otherwise his disbelief is actually a belief in rebellion to diety and in favor of self. That was my point.
In sum, there is not a scientific materialism "bar" for belief but there is for disbelief.
There a need for a non-believer to substantiate his non-belief in the absence of priors -- the non-belief is the optimal default position. Compliments of another mathematician, Reverand Thomas Bayes.
Atheists (and agnostics) are asserting the existence of God is a null prior. Non-belief is the optimal/correct default position in this case. You cannot validly assert that the non-belief of an atheist or agnostic is irrational until you establish a non-null prior.
This is THE problem: theists can only convince atheists by establishing a valid prior. This it seems is nigh impossible, and so the default position remains.