I think you're describing mutual tolerance, which is great, but not the same as a consensus. It's agreeing to differ rather than holding a discussion with the aim of agreeing on a common conclusion.

I'm all for it of course, live and let live and all that, but i don't think that's what the doorstep evangelists are trying to achieve - I think they would aim to effect change in the other person's beliefs rather than persuading people to refrain from burning them. :)

Ah, indeed, that is true, it is more tolerance than consensus. But then, I think "there is a God, who is worth worshipping" and "there's no reasonable ground for believing in a God, and tensions over worshipping this being has caused untold misery again and again and again in human history, so it's something to be avoided" are like "the sky is purple" versus "the sky is blue"; "consensus," were it to be reached, would have much bearing on reality.