Thanks to the folk at the Athiest Alliance
#1:
Distract Christians so they start arguing about peripheral questions like church history and the age of the earth, instead of the heart of their faith which is Jesus’ death and resurrection. We cannot answer that, so avoid it at all costs.
#2:
Accuse Christians of ignoring the scientific method, while failing to mention that Christianity is a faith based on historical events, and therefore uses legal/historical evidence, not scientific proofs. Make it sound like believing the Bible is irrational, even though we implicitly believe our scientific textbooks.
#3:
Exaggerate and misrepresent Biblical concepts and stories to make them sound inane and absurd. Then locate a Christian with limited Biblical literacy and ridicule them for believing such nonsense. Make sure you choose only the passages that seem nasty, not all the nice ones.
#4:
Use the same kind of idealistic rhetoric for which you criticise religious fundamentalists. This is really important, since you are actually promoting a faith system, you know.
#5:
Call people who bring up their children in the Christian faith ‘child abusers’. Because it’s such a hostile and inflammatory statement, it precludes a rational response. Ignore the fact that refusing to give a child any religious education actually deprives them of an opportunity to understand the foundation of nearly every culture that has arisen in human history.
#6:
Quote something ‘A Christian’ said rather than what the Bible says, as if the view of one follower represents the consensus of all Christians everywhere at every time. Ignore the fact that that Christian may well have misunderstood the Bible on that point, as well as the likely possibility that many people who profess Christianity are not actually true Christians.
#7:
Use words like ‘Secular’ and ‘rational,’ and terms like ‘freedom of religion,’ instead of ‘Athiest’ in describing your movement. This will throw your opponents off guard and make them think you are a benevolent organisation with goodwill. Heck, Christians do it with the Intelligent Design movement, so why can’t we?
New Jerusalem 
1. Since atheism is the rejection of religion, arguments based on religion will have no meaning to atheists.
Since atheists claim to value reason, Christians must approach the atheists with arguments based on reason.
We have as a historical role models for that approach in Saints Paul, Augustine, and Aquinas.
2. Genesis makes quite clear that the God of the Jews and the Christians is a reasonable God who created the universe in a systematic, reasonable fashion.
Therefore there is no contradiction between faith and reason since they were both authored by God.
3. I wholeheartedly agree with you here. The majority of atheist rhetoric is nothing more than crass propaganda.
4. Also very true. Since atheism cannot be proven it is a faith-based belief. In fact, since the existence of God can be proven logically, belief in atheism requires total faith.
5. If an atheist calls Christians child abusers it’s time to move on. There is no way to have a civil conversation with a bigot.
6. You also know a conversation is useless when an atheist claims that Hitler was a Christian. Such profound ignorance makes reasoning impossible.
7. For this reason I use secular arguments that are based on pure reason. The way to dismantle an opposing argument is to attack it in its own territory.
Christians must learn how to reason and use argumentation based on reason. Dinesh D’sousa is a fine example of someone who does that.
Thanks silenceofmind for your response. I would say one thing though in response to your response. There is certainly a place for using what you call ‘secular’ arguments when speaking to non-believers who have already in their mind written off the Bible. This is useful for dismantling their own worldview and showing the inconsistency of their argument. However there still needs to be the point where the word of Christ is spoken into the debate/discussion. In the end, it will not be reason or argument that will bring them to the Kingdom, but the power of the Gospel. Sometimes we need to risk ‘killing’ the conversation by bringing things back to the Gospel, otherwise there is a risk that they will perceive that one becomes a Christian by being argued into it, rather than by repentance and faith.
Bless you.
Haven’t heard this yet, but parts 1 & 2 are excellent…
http://christthetruth.net/2013/08/10/podcast-atheism-part-3-of-4/