Filling in the Gaps:
I think by now it's become painfully obvious that atheism is not a consistent, nor is it a logical worldview. It's merely a worldview that rejects God and then appears to scramble around to fill in all that His absence leaves. The more I study it, the more it makes the atheist look like a toddler caught in a lie. When confronted with logic that they know is ridiculous, they retreat into child-like defense modes (like the Noble Lie option I discussed earlier). So Biblical Christianity picks up precisely where atheism fails us. Since the Bible explains creation in full we no longer need to guess about it. The Bible assigns meaning to our Earthly life because our actions will be measured in eternity. I need to point out that I'm not speaking of salvation by works here. I'm just saying that you will stand before your creator one day and there is a level of responsibility that you will shoulder for the sum of your life. This gives you meaning, it gives you values and it provides a logical explanation for those meaning and values. Now none of this actually proves that God exists, it just proves that atheism is a horribly inconsistent worldview that offers no reward in your present life or death.
Side by Side:
Below I'm just going to summarize atheism and Christianity. It's hard to do so with no bias, but I'll try to point out the oddness in both systems. They might both come off as irrational, but I believe that the end result of each actually presents Christianity as the only logical conclusion.
Christianity is the belief that an unseen God created the universe and everything in it. He is big enough to create everything we have seen or ever will see in the universe, yet He is personal enough to listen to prayers about your aunt's, neighbor's, hip surgery. He then laid out rules that we couldn't possibly follow. Seeing how terrible we were in obedience He sent his only Son to die to absorb his wrath toward us. Keep in mind that His son was fully man, yet fully God, yet still fully man. So we killed him, buried him and He came back from the dead. So now we're gladly waiting on this guy that WE KILLED to return on a white horse, covered in tattoos, wearing a robe dipped in blood and holding a sword. All we have for evidence is a really old book that most of the world feels is filled with fairy tales and folklore.
Atheism is the belief that something came from nothing, and the nothing that produced the something doesn't really need an explanation. Over trillions of years the something that was created by the nothing started to mutate, but we're not sure why it would feel the need to change if it weren't guided by a predetermined intelligent process. All of this beginningless matter evolved over an undetermined amount of time into another shape or form. Somehow heat and cooling were involved, but we don't really know what created those either nor do atheist feel the need to explain that. Over trillions of years of unguided fine tuning, by random heating, cooling, expansion and contraction, we somehow get planets, starts, moons, etc. On these planets the random adaption continues but at least it has a place and some parameters to guide it. Within those parameters single celled organisms begin to develop and as more time elapses they become more complex. Eventually, and totally unguided by the way, these complex organisms become beagles, bugs, bears, ponies, people and pine cones. There is literally no tangible evidence that any of this happened, anywhere, ever.
Now if you were in a coma for your entire life and you were awakened with these two concepts you'd have to admit that both would sound a little odd. When you were then presented with the fact that one of these promises eternal life with the God that created you and the other offers you eternal blackness at best, it's hard for me to imagine anyone that would chose atheism.
Going Forward:
I'm done with atheism from a philosophical standpoint. I don't think you'll be able to find an atheist that can stand firmly when confronted with this line of thinking. They will refute with more scientific claims, but unless they are a scientist then it all comes off as sort of silly to me. At that point aren't they just stepping out on faith? I'm not really sure what I'll go to next, but I think a good topic would be the historical evidence for the resurrection. After studying the evidence, I'm as convinced that Christ rose from the dead as I am that Tiger Woods has played a round at Augusta.