Respectable books on apologetics?

[Cato]

And bad reasons for rejecting something does not give you anything like the intellectual high ground. Surely it shouldn't be too hard to unveal the best apologists have if it's all bullshit?


Ah, the day I have to defend apologists and apologetics from [presumably] an atheist. Irony?

MFM,
Brian's reasoning for rejecting apologetics is sound and you are coming across as someone who is arguing for the sake of arguing. My explanation might be too simple for you to understand.

Apologetics ostensibly are making the case or rely on the proposition that God exists; a claim made without evidence in support. It makes no difference what the argument is, without evidence the idea of God can be dismissed as a serious existential claim.

You also seem to suggest that it is my responsibility to unveil/unravel every apologetic before I can claim it's bullshit (your intellectual high ground comment makes little sense otherwise). If anybody were to present bonafide evidence for the existence of God it would be front page news everywhere, with heretofore unscientific Christians screaming the loudest in support. Your intellectual high ground barb dissolves into you having to support the idea that Brian, myself, and others like us must individually pour through every apologetic because there's a chance that one exists, as elusive as the God it claims, that hasn't been properly vetted.

I also don't have to entertain and dismiss every account of close encounters to make the reasonable assertion that extra terrestrial visitation of the Earth is bullshit.