There are many attempts by christians to provide the illusion of proof of their god. All of them fall far short of the minimum requirement for what is proof.
So they are trying this relatively new tactic of creating a slippery slope for what is acceptable proof.
The ill-fated logic proofs:
First mover tactic. This tactic states that everything moves, that nothing can move unless there was something to start it. It is sometimes called first cause.
The problem with this is two-fold.
1) The premise is false. They never actually prove that there needs to be a first cause or prime mover.
2) The can't prove that there is a first cause or a prime mover let alone that it is a god. They never make a connection. Hell, they don't even prove the premise in the first place.
Another tactic is to create a "push-poll" type of question. It goes like this.
There are only two states of being. "Everything is either eternal or not correct?"
Again a false premise. They have proved that everything is either eternal or not and eliminated every possibility because they don't know every possibility. The tactic here is to cause people to just accept THEIR premise so that they can continue to seemingly logically conclude that there must have been at least one eternal thing and that that eternal thing is their god. The problem is that the "push-poll" has a predetermined outcome and it is false in the first place. Secondly, if there is something eternal, they never make a connection or prove that it is their god.
Right now in the last few days, 3 theists have been pushing these false premises. They aren't defending them, they are avoiding a minimum requirement of proof. They quote scripture for the stone age book written in the 4th century, use false narratives like "you can see creation so it must be true."

Oh, but we atheists are ignorant and have to have a great deal of "faith' to not believe in their god. Have you read anything so fucking absurd?
Of course, we have seen this all before. They think that they are original, that they are conveying something new, but they are not. They are just dressing up the same old apologies for not having proof. One of them even told me "One cannot use that which measures the natural world or things inside the universe to find something outside of the natural world." Then he went on to tell me how this external force effects the natural world. UNBELIEVABLE!