If truth is agreement (one definition of truth that's hard to disagree with without supporting the definition), then on one level, of course the consensus will be more true than any one belief system.
Maybe everyone can agree that all peaceful profits are good representations of a pantheistic nature-like god (so the atheist can be on board), and that all scripture is flawed, to some degree, and in need of interpretation in a historical context. To please the scientific community we could say "god is an infinite spiritual computer". To please Muslims, we can honor Mohammed and the beauty of the Koran while, like in the case of the Christian Bible, downplaying areas of scripture that are negative or confusingly vague.
We could say to the Atheist that, even if all of these writings are nothing more than historical fiction, can one still form an ethical understanding from even Aesop's fables? Omega Point Theory by Frank Tipler is an interesting intersect between physics and theology- though it rests on many assumptions. Only one of the assumptions in Omega Point need be true- that all possible worlds exist.