Burden of proof

I'm going to respond to a claim made in this:

http://triablogue.blogspot.co.za/2018/02/suppose-all-protestants-thought-alike.html

To take a comparison, consider a typical debate with a village atheist. They lead with a particular reason for rejecting Christianity. If you shoot down their stated reason, it doesn't faze them at all. They just reach into the bag for another reason. You can go down the list, and it makes no difference.

No. The village atheist has no burden of proof. All he needs do is say "convince me". Square one must be non-belief. That's the default. We don't need to give reasons for rejecting Christianity.  That's not a belief that stands "until it can be proved wrong", it's a belief that can only exist in the first place if it can be proved right.

So give us that evidence. How did you arrive at the conclusion Christianity was right. Perhaps it'll be convincing, perhaps you'll reach into the bag and grab another reason. But it's not for atheists to have to justify non-belief.