I could be remembering wrong, but I thought part of their early schtick was to provide evidence for His Great Noodliness using chains of logic similar to what s

I could be remembering wrong, but I thought part of their early schtick was to provide evidence for His Great Noodliness using chains of logic similar to what some Christians used in public debates. Note: I'm not saying that the benefit of Pastafarianism was that it refuted Christianity. Rather, I'm saying that it exposed the weaknesses of some arguments being used to promote Christianity. I think serious Christian apologists would agree that bad arguments for Christianity should be discarded.