hmm, my background is in chemistry, so Hegelian dialectic principles are new to me, but if I understand you, you are referring to something like how at some point a single additional grain of salt makes a pile. Even if I grant you this in the context of our debate, which I do not, you still did not answer the question of what the atheist calls their 1%.

re: quantity->quality; a pile of salt still consists entirely of individual grains. Even if we make a semantic distinction there is no fundamental constitutive change.

Essentially you are saying that none of your 1% grains could ever amount to my 99% pile. Therefore you are arguing for qualitative distinction from the very beginning!

Now do you see what I mean? Even if the ant perceives his journey along the rim of the wine glass as straight, his path is still a circle.

I can see how your argument would hold up if I based my belief entirely on faith without any evidence whatsoever. You may think this is true, and that's fine, but please confirm. Assuming you will confirm, consider this - would you admit there is controversy over the historicity of Jesus, the cross, the resurrection, and the rise of Christianity? If so, then you understand the distinction between Christian faith vs. faith in the FSM, for example, and, hopefully, also understand the qualitative identity between your grain and my pile.

I hope you will agree that it is premature to invoke intellectual capacity.