Credible/Honest Apologetics?

[Fake Messiah]

So my question is - does anyone have suggetions on where to look on the theist side for something honest? 

Honest? It's like asking is there some honest ufologist who has some honest books about aliens and flying saucers.

Perhaps both ufologists and theologians feel like they are being honest but when you look in their books you see that it is very dishonest because they are delusional.

[Pat Mustard]

As I go through the process of continually reexamining by beliefs (largely now former beliefs), I remain committed to being open minded and considering all sides of any issue.  Honestly, that what has led to my deconversion - considering sources and facts which were hidden/forbidden/shouted down in my world for decades.  To that end, I find a lot on the atheist/agnostic/none position which I find very intellectually satisfying and honest.  Everyone has their bias, so no one is truly down the middle, but in particular I enjoy reading Shermer, Ehrman, Harris, etc - all the ones you might expect.

So my question is - does anyone have suggetions on where to look on the theist side for something honest?  I say that because the sources I am pointed toward by theists tend to feel like sales jobs treading over well-worn arguments (Kalaam, Pascal, gaps, etc) rather than true explorations.  I'm getting suggested folks like WL Craig, Habermas, Strobel, Licona - and I just feel like they are all starting with their desired answer and backfilling.  Are there others that might provide any satisfying thoughts?

Unless the apologist says "I believe hecause I'm too incurious/ it's too much of a moneyspinner for me to properly examine my beliefs", then they're being dishonest from the very start.

The only exception to this rule would be an apologist writing pre-1500.

[The Valkyrie]

Yes.

I have the high ground and I'm dug in pretty firmly.

Sorry, you were just outflanked by a dictionary.

Not outflanked.

[Jehanne]

So my question is - does anyone have suggetions on where to look on the theist side for something honest? 

Honest? It's like asking is there some honest ufologist who has some honest books about aliens and flying saucers.

Perhaps both ufologists and theologians feel like they are being honest but when you look in their books you see that it is very dishonest because they are delusional.

It never occurred to me (until now) to compare ufologists and theologians, but, the similarity is striking. I remember an ufologist ripping Dr. Bill Nye a new one on live television; Dr. Nye's sublime, silent countenance with his attentive stoic look was truly amazing, as his adversary make a complete ass out of himself!

[The Grand Nudger]

It’s an interesting relationship . Honesty about why a person believes what they do is fundamentally credible- but…otoh, those honest and credible answers are overwhelmingly incapable of establishing the honesty and credibility of the contents of their beliefs.

We have people here on these boards who are honest and credible when they explain why they became Christian’s…for example. I believe that’s why they believe. The rest…the actual specified content….? Runs the gamut of simply incorrect to absurdly incorrect.

[TheJefe817]

In particular, I can recommend:

The Blackwell Companion To Natural Theology (Craig, Moreland, ed.)

and

Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview (Craig, Moreland, et al.)

Thanks for that - I ordered the Philosophical Foundations and will check out the Blackwell.  To be honest, I have become less a fan of Craig over the years, but then I only really know his popular works and some of his debates.  He's a very skilled (if disingenuous) debater - I re-watched the one with Hitchens and was amused at how often he would avoid/change the subject and also mischaracterize the discussion (ie: that Hitchens needed to "prove" atheism is true).  Regardless, I'll give this a chance.

[TheJefe817]

If I may...have you considered the texts of the Church Fathers, such as Augustine and Thomas Aquinas, and early mystics, like the author of Cloud of Unknowing? The mystic do not do apologetics in the same way as the Scholastics. IMHO they are guideposts to experience more than exposition, which is just another human strategy for knowing...through image and symbol. That includes Swedenborg, Blake, Bohem, among others. You also have historic sermons like John Edward's sinner before an angry God for the hard core Reformed.

For modern stuff, you might try David Benteley Hart for the Orthodox perspective. Online StrangeNotions.com has lots of approachable articles and for more academic philosophical reading I regularly visit maverickphilosopher.

Ultimately, it depends on your intent. If you truly want to understand various Christian perpectives then you will gain much from the above. If your goal is to justify your deconversion, then I wish you luck. I was an atheist until I started to comprehend what I was blithly dismissing. YMMV

Thank you.  I am unfamiliar with Bentley, but it looks like he has some interesting works - I see there is one about universal salvation, which I am interested in checking out - not a subject I know much about.

To clarify, I'm not trying to justify anything in particular.  I'm looking for perspectives from all directions.  I know you were applying the word "blithe" to yourself, not me, but I can assure you my journey has been anything but.  After decades of belief, church attendance as both a follower and a leader and teacher, etc, etc, and now literally thousands of hours of thought and study, I would certainly not call it blithe.

[TheJefe817]

So my question is - does anyone have suggetions on where to look on the theist side for something honest? 

Honest? It's like asking is there some honest ufologist who has some honest books about aliens and flying saucers.

Perhaps both ufologists and theologians feel like they are being honest but when you look in their books you see that it is very dishonest because they are delusional.

Point taken.  "Honest" is probably not the correct/precise word I was trying to get to there.  Obviously at this point I question the honesty of the underlying beliefs/material.  I'm not sure how to characterize it, but more along the lines of less of a sales pitch feeling, with acknowledgement of areas which garner further discussion.

For instance, I was explaining this to someone recently:  I have never, until very recently, been aware of many of the textual issues of the Bible (Johannine comma, for instance).  I'm pretty well-read, but perhaps some of that was my own self-editing in terms of what I was consuming and also what of those sources I was filtering out, but I also just have a deep feeling that many of these things - well known to any person who ever went to seminary - are at best glossed over and at worst intentionally hidden.  I admire it more when areas of ambiguity are put up for an honest (there's that word again) discussion - ie: the aforementioned comma, or - to take it from the other side - the science of consciousness and implications of such.

But then, I'm a newbie in deep water, so I may also just be naive at this point.  Just sponging it all in.

[The Grand Nudger]

It will never -not- be a pitch, since any accurate description of any religion is a statement of how the world should be (according to whomever)….not how it is.

That’s the entire business of religion. Circumscribing a good life, not whatever life we happen to have.

[Brian37]

As I go through the process of continually reexamining by beliefs (largely now former beliefs), I remain committed to being open minded and considering all sides of any issue.  Honestly, that what has led to my deconversion - considering sources and facts which were hidden/forbidden/shouted down in my world for decades.  To that end, I find a lot on the atheist/agnostic/none position which I find very intellectually satisfying and honest.  Everyone has their bias, so no one is truly down the middle, but in particular I enjoy reading Shermer, Ehrman, Harris, etc - all the ones you might expect.

So my question is - does anyone have suggetions on where to look on the theist side for something honest?  I say that because the sources I am pointed toward by theists tend to feel like sales jobs treading over well-worn arguments (Kalaam, Pascal, gaps, etc) rather than true explorations.  I'm getting suggested folks like WL Craig, Habermas, Strobel, Licona - and I just feel like they are all starting with their desired answer and backfilling.  Are there others that might provide any satisfying thoughts?

They are incapable of being neutral, they have a bias and ultimately whatever presupposition they start with, whatever follows that works backwards after the fact.