Devil's Advocate

[Angrboda]

If the OP is truly serious, perhaps he could challenge an atheist to a formal debate on a central claim in which he argued the anti or atheist position, and the atheist did the reverse.

I'm sure these type of exercises have their utility in sharpening one's understanding, I just don't see an adequate payoff involved for me. If I had to, I'd likely pursue an argument from subjectivity, in line with Chad and Benny's thoughts, though perhaps that's an inappropriate side of the fence for me.

(ETA: As an interesting twist, the debaters would have to submit their arguments for their true position on the question in secret to a moderator; then afterwards, the true arguments of each debater could be compared to the devil's advocate's arguments.)