Possibly a very stupid question....

[TM99]

9. I must gently rebutt your post.

You have only presented one side of this 'argument'.

Here is the other from Batchelor himself:

http://mandala.fpmt.org/archives/mandala-issues-for-2011/january/an-open-letter-to-b-alan-wallace/

And here is a discussion that takes it just one step deeper:

http://mandala.fpmt.org/archives/mandala-issues-for-2011/april/an-old-story-of-faith-and-doubt-reminiscences-of-alan-wallace-and-stephen-batchelor/

“Do not be satisfied with hearsay or with tradition or with legendary lore or with what has come down in scriptures or with conjecture or with logical inference or with weighing evidence or with liking for a view after pondering over it or with someone else’s ability or with the thought, ‘This monk is our teacher.’ When you know in yourselves: “These things are wholesome, blameless, commended by the wise, and being adopted and put into effect they lead to welfare and happiness,” then you should practice and abide in them.” – Siddhartha Gotama, the Buddha; from the Kalama Sutra (trans. Nanamoli Thera)

So let me ask you this question. If someone is approaching the Dharma for the first time and expresses that they are an 'atheist', is it more loving to guide them to a writer who thinks as they do for their first taste of these teachings or to steer them towards the most metaphysical tantric traditions out there?