The Question Of God 's Existence

Having completed the unit of philosophy of religion, you are now ready to respond to an article written by an actual atheist.  This article, titled “On Being an Atheist,” was written by H. J. McCloskey in 1968 for the journal Question.  McCloskey is an Australian philosopher who wrote a number of atheistic works in the 1960s and 70s including the book God and Evil (Nijhoff, 1974). In this article, McCloskey is both critical of the classical arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God.

In the article “ On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey attempts to inform his readers that the belief in atheism is a “much more comfortable belief” by effectively using a disdainful rhetoric towards theists and their faith. McCloskey delves into both the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, which within he criticizes the arguments and to further his argument against theism, he also presents the Problem of Evil and why evil cannot possibly exist with a perfect God being the creator of universe. What will be displayed in this essay are the counter-arguments to McCloskey’s criticisms and the attempt to discredit his claims that regard the “comfortable” position that lies within atheism and its arguments.

In the articles, McCloskey believes he has the proof of being a Atheists is a much easier religion than that of Christianity. He believes that Atheism is a more functional form of beliefs and has a series of arguments to justify his points. He summarizes all of his “proofs” which conclude from his research that there is not enough evidence to support the existence of God. Within the article, McCloskey presents to the reader three different series of arguments in regards to why he is against Christianity. The arguments he sets before the reader are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument of design. He also touches on the points about the problem of evil and how it can be interpreted [1.] McCloskey states “ that

H.J. McCloskey, in his article, “On Being an Atheist,” presents a series of arguments to defend and justify his atheist beliefs. He debates arguments for God’s existence including the cosmological argument and the teleological argument; says these arguments are false and argues that without “proof,” we must dismiss the idea of God entirely. He is critical of the arguments for God’s existence and offers the problem of evil as a reason why one should not believe in God. Ultimately, his main objection to the idea of God is the presence of evil in the world. McCloskey scrutinizes specific claims made by those who support the existence of a Creator, the Christian God.

In his article, On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey tried to show that atheism is a more reasonable and comfortable belief than that of Christianity. McCloskey argued against the three theistic proofs, which are the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and the argument from design. He pointed out the existence of evil in the world that God made. He also pointed out that it is irrational to live by faith. In my response, I will argue that McCloskey’s article is one-sided and thus flawed in his conclusion that atheism is more comforting than Christianity and when one examines all the evidence, Christianity is truly a source for great comfort today.

The question of God’s existence has been challenged by many philosophers and non-philosophers alike over the years. Arguments that have been used to support the existence of a divine being includes; the cosmological argument and the theological argument. However, there are some who oppose these arguments and philosopher H.J. McCloskey is among this group. In the article “On Being an Atheist” written by H.J. McCloskey, he argues that both these arguments are false and insufficient as it relates to “proof” of God’s existence. McCloskey believes that without proper proof, we must completely dismiss the idea of God’s existence. In his well-written article, he offers a few reasons why he believes that atheism is a much more comfortable belief versus, a belief in a God who allows the suffering of his people. He suggested that the problem of evil and the fact that evil exists meant that God could not exist. McCloskey urges that people should just help each other rather than, placing their faith in a God that is clearly imperfect due to the imperfect world that he has created. Credible as McCloskey may be, I saw many errors in his theory. It is my opinion that his attempt to define God is completely unsound, and his philosophy is at best debatable. In this response paper, I will be carefully examining each argument and also presenting a counter argument. I will be taking the stance from the perspective of a minimal theism who

The question of God’s existence has been challenged by many philosophers and non-philosophers alike. Arguments that have been used to support the existence of a divine being includes the cosmological argument and the theological argument. However there are some who oppose these arguments and philosopher H.J. McCloskey is among this group. In the article “On Being an Atheist” written by H.J. McCloskey, he argues that both these arguments are false and insufficient as it relates to “proof” of God’s existence. McCloskey believes that without proper proof, we must completely dismiss the idea of God’s existence. In his well-written article he offers a few reasons why he believes that atheism is a much more comfortable belief verses a belief in a God who allows the suffering of his people. He suggested that the problem of evil and the fact that evil exist, means that God could not exist. McCloskey urges that people should just help each other rather than placing their faith in a God that is clearly imperfect due to the imperfect world that he has created. Credible as McCloskey may be, I saw many errors in his theory. It is my opinion that his attempt to define God is completely unsound and his philosophy is at best debatable. In this response paper I will be carefully examining each argument and also presenting a counter argument. I will be taking the stance from the perspective of a minimal theism who believes in the existence of God.

And in this paper, I will argue that this argument about atheism is wrong about questioning the existence of God. I will prove and defend that God does really exists.

In H.J. McCloskey’s article entitled “On Being an Atheist” he builds an argument against the existence of God. He wrote this article with the intentions of arguing in contradiction of two of the three theistic proofs, which are: cosmological argument, theological argument. H.J. McCloskey presents an aggregate dispute that’s pulls in the Cosmological and Theological arguments and combines them together. The cosmological case he put together is concerning the existence of God, and the theological case serves as the intellectual case. Together these arguments make a strong snowballing case. However these arguments are not the only subjects addressed in his article. McCloskey also touches on the Atheism as being comforting and the problem of evil.

In his article “On Being an Atheist,” McCloskey argues against the claims of a God, and addresses many of the Christian ideals in his writings. He refutes what Christians believe as truths, and gives many reasons as to why these truths are false, and why he believes Christians are blind to their real existence. He gives examples of the beliefs that Christians follow, and seeks to discredit those ideas. He mentions the general idea of a Creator, but specifically focuses on the Christian ideal of a God.

H.J. McCloskey aimed to show that atheism is a more satisfying and justifiable belief than that of Christianity. He did so in his article entitled, On Being an Atheist. To construct this claim, he argued against the theistic proofs: the theological argument, the argument of design, and the cosmological argument. He calls for an acknowledgment of the existence of evil in the world and says that those who are theist “carry on as if the existence of evil in the world did not seriously tell against the perfection of the divine design” (McCloskey, 1968, p. 51). McCloskey also makes the claim that if faith and a God truly do exist, we must conclude that he is imperfect. Followers of Christianity are to be considered “irrational and foolish” for their

The question of whether or not God exists is central to many modes of understanding and systems of knowledge, both theological and philosophical, and the implications of the answer to this question are quite far reaching indeed. The very fabric of reality depends upon the knowledge that this question seeks to obtain, and the manner in which an investigation of God's existence (or non-existence) is conducted and the specific inquiries that are made in this regard have their own implications on understandings in all areas of human knowledge and action. The following presents a point-by-point examination and refutation of one specific argument that has been raised as "proof" that God cannot exist.

The arguments which question the validity of God's existence, have more than likely, persisted for over several centuries. However, amongst these arguments, questioning the existence of God, exist major arguments presented in the teleological and cosmological arguments. In “On Being an Atheist,” McCloskey (1968) sets out to reiterate his position as an atheist by offering counterarguments to specific theistic positions. Moreover, while contending his claim that the arguments which question the validity of the existence of God are fundamentally false and that without absolute proofs, people ought to dismiss the idea that there is an omniscient and omnipotent being. Likewise, he alleges that the major indicator of the non-existence

Theists and atheists have debated the existence of God for eons. Is there a God? If there is an all-powerful, omniscient being of sorts, then what proof do we have that he exists? If God does exist then why is there so much evil in the world? Why do innocent people suffer? Such questions may never be answered definitively. In the article “On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey presents some arguments made by theists in favor of the existence of God and then proceeds to debate those arguments from an atheistic perspective. The arguments discussed include the cosmological argument and the teleological argument. McCloskey also discusses the problem of evil and how it can serve as evidence that God does not exist. McCloskey offers some thought-provoking and opinions in his article, but they do not serve to completely discredit the arguments and ideas that theists present to favor the existence of a benevolent and omnipotent God.

My paper scrutinizes numerous logical disputes for and alongside the presence of God. I shall argue that there’s no adequate evidence or inclusive arguments for the existence of God. It is grounded on the views of certain great philosophers and scientists of all of mankind.