Some of us are not Christians, but rather philosophical theists.

Hello CGillon!
Thank you for coming in and asking questions!
As for the POE, I can't really give you an emotional response, but an intellectual one.
In the Classical theist tradition (Before Descartes), God is not a moral agent and cannot go through metaphysical change. What do I mean by this? Us humans are committed to the moral law to become better people, which means that we can change. In respectable metaphysical terms, we actualize potencies or fail to realize potencies. Since God is what we call Actus Purus or Pure Actuality, then God is Completeness/Perfection. There is no such thing as becoming better or worse in God and that's why the moral law does not apply to God. God just is Goodness or cannot be evil. Otherwise, he would not be God. I know this is hard to swallow, but God has no moral obligations.

Also, evil in the classical viewpoint is defined as the absence of goodness or a failed realization. Whenever, you see a tree grow, it naturally strives to be a mature tree, that is its end. Say, a tree has a genetic defect then something went wrong with that tree. The tree failed to be realized fully. My point is that in order for evil to "happen" a more fundamental reality has to be there first. Its just in the nature of contingent reality for things to corrupt and come and go. In fact, we can even use evil to show God exists, accepting the premise that change happens or contingent reality is there is one step to God's existence. 

Hope this helps a little bit, and thank you for your time.
 

CS Lewis, in general, makes a basic introduction to Christianity. His book Mere Christianity is still a pretty popular book for people who are interested in Christianity. His other works like the Screwtape Letters are pretty entertaining and interesting. Peter Kreeft also devotes work on basic Christianity. Check out some of his books like Fundamentals of the Faith or Jesus-Shock.

Hello and welcome to this forum
As a quick note, there are some Protestant philosophers who defend or embrace Scholastic philosophy such as Dr. James Dolezal and Norman Geisler.

AKG wrote:

@Mysterious Brony
In my case it was in a highschool TOK class with a non-philosopher teacher, but the fact that you encountered this strawman in an actual philosophy class makes me worried about the status of modern day philosophical academia. In fact before I graduate I'm going to make a powerpoint for all my TOK teachers about the cosmological arguments to show them what it actually says and so they don't repeat this bull to future students.

Well, firstly, don't get the impression that philosophy professors will always teach natural theology caricatures. As far as I am concerned, any philosopher can make mistakes regarding someone's position. Secondly, I remember taking an intro to philosophy class in some other secular college and the Thomistic arguments (Second Way) were treated more fairly. I think the professor embraced a secular worldview, but he seemed like a nice guy and was more balanced than other secular philosophers.