Many apologists dismiss atheist arguments as being unserious. We obviously can't have a good argument against god and theology because there aren't any for such serious topics that thoughtful, professional theologians came up with over the years. Obviously. Harumph.
So, what are these serious theological arguments? Aquinas's 5 proofs that have been destroyed repeatedly? C.S. Lewis's shoddy arguments trying to apologize for god's crap treatment of all of us (we have to suffer so that we can appreciate not suffering; because god couldn't have created a better world?), or Plantinga's off-the-wall ideas about how it's rational to believe in god since we can't be certain that he doesn't exist (making it also rational to believe in Baal, Allah, FSM, Russell's floating teapot, etc.)
Ah, but dismiss those arguments and make counters and apologists will simply note that you are wrong, that you haven't really addressed the issue, and then go on their merry way not bothering to actually look at your argument or show you what is in error. Why? Because you can't possibly be serious or erudite enough to point out the holes in such intellectual heavyweight arguments unless you also have a Ph.D. in making stuff up. Well, it doesn't work that way. I don't need to have a Ph.D. in theology to be able to read the Bible and see the holes in it. I don't need that Ph.D. in order to read the arguments of the theists and see the holes in them. Most of these arguments are third rate, yet theists have simply accepted them as great simply because of confirmation bias. How many times have theists come here and simply said that our logic is full of holes but not been able to back it up?
OK, rant over.