Analysis Of H.j 's Article ' A Journal Call Question

1362 Words6 Pages
H.J. McCloskey Published an article in a journal call Question One in February of 1968, he named it “On Being an Atheist”. In McCloskey’s article, he states a very compelling explanation in why he thinks the everlasting disputes of God’s existence fails. My paper is responding to McCloskey’s arguments with a theistic worldview.
In McCloskey’s article, he ventured to explain how atheism is by far more rational, as well as more comfortable than theism is. McCloskey used the word “proof” instead of “theory” to add deceptive power to this argument of his. Unfortunately, there are many of his theories that can be and are accepted as a truth, but they cannot be absolutely proven. Nothing in this world can be proven one
…show more content…
The Cosmological Argument as previously discussed, is the existence of the universe and “cosmos” is the direct suggestion that God exists. This can be and is often indicated as the “first-cause argument”. This is because they believe that God is the first reason for the cause of the existence of the universe. One of McCloskey first complaints is that people are not suitable to believe that the universe needs a cause. McCloskey finds this to be true simply because, it would require a root for the universe which in turn, would also obligate a source for God. He then continues to profess that even if the cosmological argument is able to facilitate us to hypothesize the existence of God, then there would be no reason to hypothesize that God has to be omniscient, omnipotent, and many more. There are living things in our world that have no clue how they came to be. Essentially everything that happens has to be caused by something, which would mean that the actualization of our universe has to be contingent on a cause. He also stated that he believes that the cosmological argument, “does not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused cause,“ (McCloskey, 51). It seems that McCloskey believes that it is not necessary to believe in an “uncaused cause” merely because the earth exists. McCloskey feels as if the only outcome that we can take
Get Access