Wow—a long video. I would like to listen to the whole thing sometime, but 2 1/2 hours is just too much right now. I agree with you that he seems very down-to-earth, personable, and pleasant—not with the hostility and disrespect that we hear from other strident atheists. I have found many times that I share his thoughts: God is remarkably unresponsive and non-engaging. For me, my belief comes not from my experiences of God responding to me, talking to me, answering prayer, or engaging with me, but that God is the most reasonable explanation for the universe, truth, personality, morality, purpose, and life. Even if God never talks to me (which He does in His Word, certainly), my conviction of HIs existence is based on logic and reason more so than my direct experiences of His seeking me out.

I was watching a recent debate between Jonathan McLatchie and Alex O’Connor on the topic of Theism vs Naturalism: Which is a Better Account of Reality? If you have ever heard of Alex O'Connor, he is a well-known atheist youtuber with the channel Cosmic Skeptic. Though I disagree on many points with him, I find his approach far less biased than most in how they handle the arguments and really appreciate his openness to the discussion in most debates I have seen.

In this debate, his open brings up a good point in the area of divine hiddenness. A common discussion point for atheists and one I have heard various times. But I felt Alex's approach was more personal and sincere specifically in the idea of non-resistant non-belief. Here is the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HIm5KFvTOws&t=2683s

@ 36:38-45:43 Alex talks about the idea of truly wanting God to be real and seeking Him out very strongly in various ways and being left unconvinced. Knowing who he is and his channel, I'm inclined to believe he is sincere though I can't know his heart and how God interacts with him directly. He could still be relying too much on his thought process and expecting 100% assurance which he will never find. Or it could be some secret resentment or past trauma that pulls him away in such a way that makes him resistant unintentionally. Or something else entirely in how God works that we are not aware of. He goes on to talk about naturalism being better at explaining faith based on location which is an old trope that I can find a number of reasons to disagree with. Naturalism still doesn't have sufficiency in explanation for me on a fundamental level so most of his other points are harder for me to sit with. That said, I do find the idea of non-resistant non-belief intriguing as we are generally led to believe that God is always waiting for us not the other way around. Curious to hear your thoughts on this idea.