In examining a number of the atheistic arguments currently being discussed in the philosophy of religion I have found myself largely unsatisfied with the responses given by the theists. The tactic undertaken in many of these objections is either to qualify how the particular term or concept being examined is not actually as it appears to the atheist, or to try to point out some logical flaw in the atheistic argument itself. In the first place, pointing out logical inconsistencies within particular atheistic arguments, while useful, can only get the theist so far, in that that only allows him to dispel the bad and poorly formulated atheistic arguments. Doing so does nothing to strengthen the theistic view at all. Secondly, it seems that the theistic responses given to many atheistic arguments are very narrow in scope, solving (at best) one specific problem but leaving many more questions to be answered and problems to be resolved elsewhere. While one area of classical theism has been smoothed out it is only done at the concession of creating (or at least leaving) wrinkles elsewhere. This method has resulted in a very fragmented conception of theism with each aspect often being discussed in isolation of other aspects. The problem that has come from this is that the amount of inconsistencies and various schools of thought within classical theism have been exposed, making for piecemeal accounts of who God is and what He does but that can perhaps stand up to one or two atheistic arguments but not to atheistic arguments as a whole. Rather than addressing each particular atheistic argument one at a time within the framework of classical theism, what is needed is an entire shift in theistic thought. Rather than having an account that tries continually to explain away its apparent inconsistencies from a variety of different angles, a theistic explanation needs to be forwarded that simply deals with all of the atheistic arguments from the same direction and remains consistent. A shift in theistic thought that stands up to atheistic arguments, is simple and consistent, and maintains as many aspects of classical theism as possible is needed.