You want to talk about the "rational," do you disrgr? "Time to make it real -- compared to WHAT?"
The part you and your colleagues tend to obscure or forget is that man's reason, if unsupported by Logos, has no wind nor sea room. Man's reason is measured against the real conditions that obtain in nature -- universal, human, social -- that a competent sailor cannot obviate or disregard, if he means to survive the voyage. If you catch my drift.
By the way, I do not believe in "an invisible magician in the sky." I leave that sort of thing to Swift's Laputans.
Rather, in my experience God is not "an invisible magician in the sky," but a tangibly real living Presence.
Whereas what I am saying is that every person--including/especially atheists--must decide for her/himself what is rational, and that for me at least, the Buddhist guideline of trying to do that which causes the most happiness and the least suffering is a pretty good yardstick.
I am puzzled by your reference to "surviv[ing] the voyage". Do you mean the "voyage" of life? Because obviously no one survives that. To what were you referring?
Also, if it's not too much trouble, would you mind elaborating on the "tangible" nature of your god? You're Christian, aren't you? In my 40+ years as a Christian I never found the Christian god to be tangible, and am very interested in the fact that you do. Or are we each using the same word to signify different things again?
Anyway, it's been an interesting discussion, and I thank you for it! May you be well and happy!