No, this is you imagining that you understand my motivation and intention here better than I do myself. But, then, admittedly, one way or another, we all seem forced to make leaps of this sort.
All I can do [as I point out time and again] is to note the many instances in the past when I did not reject a frame of mind that was opposed to my own. Over time any number of folks have managed to yank me up out of one or another set of assumptions embedded in one or another objectivist frame of mind.
Relating either to God and religion or not.
Is it reasonable to note that Donald Trump is in fact a Christian?
There are some minimal requirements to be satisfied.
Here it depends on where you draw the line. For some that requirement revolves solely around actually having met Donald Trump; and Trump then convincing them that he is in fact a Christian. Others go back even further – the solipsist for example. Or those who insist that Trump is just one more character in a simulated reality that all of us “exist” in.
What then are the minimal requirements that the Christian is required to have in order to convince either Non-Christians or atheists that in fact Jesus Christ died for our sins?
Same as “a heap of sand”. We reasonable know that it is not one grain or two or a few. There is a quantity of sand where it becomes unclear/disputable whether it is a heap. Then it becomes clear again once some quantity is surpassed.
You however make it seem that it’s always in dispute.
What is not in dispute however is the existence of all those grains of sand.
Hell, here, we may as well get into a debate as to whether Pluto really is in fact not a planet.