I will become Atheist if.....

[Edwardo Piet]

1. You can rationally justify belief in a value of a human being in the framework of Atheism (and I am using this definition as in non-belief in supernatural gods).

People are valuable because of the value they are able to bring into the world, to themselves and to others (others including all conscious beings, not just humans). That's the only real value that exists in this world. Belief in God can't get you more than that.

2. You can rationally justify you being the same person as a child with that framework, that despite all the changes, you are the same person.

I don't understand this point. I was the same as a child. I've been an atheist since I was about 10 when I learned about evolution so I no longer needed to believe in an intelligent being to explain the existence of the beautiful variety of humans, animals and plants anymore. Before then I was a deist. I have never been religious. Even as a tiny child I assumed the Bible and Koran were just fables or story books. It wasn't until I was a young adult that I became shocked that adults actually literally believe that crazy magical stuff.

3. You can rationally justify your actions being linked to who you are and there is a such thing as "better" or "worse" when it comes to humans.

There is a such thing as better or worse. It's worse to harm someone than to help someone, and better to help someone than to harm someone. No one deserves to suffer unnecessarily. You'd need a rational justifcation for why unnecessary suffering wouldn't be unnecessary harm and unnecessarily bad.

My actions are linked to who I am, but who I am is ultimately linked to cause and effect and it's the same with everyone and everything else.

4.  You can rationally justify the belief in justice with your framework.

Retributive justice is evil and immoral. I can rationally justify that all beings that are born into this world equally don't deserve to suffer unnecessarily, simply by the fact that that doesn't need a rational justification but the opposite would.

5. You can rationally justify the nature of love that has language that judges all things and gives value to all things from your framework.

That's all just nonsense. Love is not in all things. Love is in human brains, and in the brains of other lifeforms that are of similar intelligence and have similar positive emotions. Love is a positive emotion, and the value of love is also part of the brain. And true, real, objective values, objectively reside within the brain, and are very real and, indeed, valuable. That's why we call them values in the first place. Even the so-called 'incorrect values' are valuable to someone, if they're values at all in the concrete, and not just in the hypothetical. If someone values something, then that really is valuable, at least to them, and objectively so. The ontology of values resides in their brain, but outside of that it's epistemic objectivity that is interesting on this matter. And ontologically subjective values can be objective epistemically.

I am not saying you have to do all 5. You can do 1. Trust me, my faith will fall and shred, if you can and I'm not joking.  It will shred.

I thought you were going to stop posting about religion? Did you just make that thread to get a bunch of kudos?