Atheists don't have to validate anything? In practice, atheists are going up against an institution that's been foundational for civilization for thousands of years. Is there no social risk of demonstrating that God is dead? Nietzsche thought that that result was catastrophic.

Or do atheists presume that we need never apologize for following the truth wherever it leads, for being pure modern philosophers and seeking enlightenment? Leo Strauss thought otherwise. What if trying to eliminate all delusions deprives us of the chance of being happy? Or what if that kind of enlightenment is impossible, contrary to the conceits of atheists and secular humanists? Wouldn't atheists therefore have to show that secular delusions are better than theistic ones?

I think I make that same point in the article about the statistical likelihood of meeting someone who has five dollars. A trillionaire, though, would be orders of magnitude more powerful even than a billionaire. That's the point of the analogy, since God would be orders of magnitude more powerful than any human. The difference in the orders of magnitude breaks the statistical analysis, I think.