H.J. McCloskey wrote a journal article in 1968 called “On Being an Atheist” which denounced the existence of the Intelligent Designer. He uses different tactics to try and prove that there could not be a God. McCloskey shows that his argument for atheism is not sound as the evidence he proves in his article can be combatted with well-thought responses provided by philosophers and Christians in order to show there is the possibility God exists.
To illustrate the weak points in McCloskey’s article, I will start with his use of “proofs”. McCloskey uses “proofs” in his arguments when combating against whether God is real. He believes since it cannot be proved that God exists that anything that cannot be proven is invalid and should be omitted (On Being an Atheist, 1968). Dr. Mark Foreman says when arguing if something is true, do not use “proofs” as no matter what nothing can be proved including God (Foreman, 2012). Nothing can be positively proved throughout the universe, so the method of proving is invalid. For example, I cannot prove without a doubt that I am truly sitting, but that does not mean that I nor the chair do not exist. There still is the possibility that I exist and so does the chair, just as there is the possibility that God exists as well. McCloskey should be careful using “proofs” in order to establish a case that God does not exist as other methods can be brought to light as to whether they can be accurately proven to be real.
Additionally, McCloskey claims that since the universe exists that there cannot be a being who created it (On Being an Atheist, 1968, p. 51). C. Stephen Evans and R. Zachary Manis in Philosophy of Religion: Thinking About Faith suggest, when discussing the non-temporal form of the cosmologica...
... middle of paper ...
...iefs of an Intelligent Designer, but gives weak examples and the use of “proofs” to try to show atheism is the way to go. He does not give an unbiased view of atheism and uses emotional tactics to try to sway readers to his side. Evans and Manis provide sound arguments in order to combat McCloskey’s damaging argument which he unsuccessfully proves atheism is better than theism.
Works Cited
Craig, W. L. (2008). The Absurdity of Life without God. In Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, 3rd Ed. (pp. 71-90). Wheaton: Crossway Books.
Evans, C. S., & Manis, R. Z. (2009). Philosophy of Religion: Thinking About Faith (Second Edition) (Kindle Edition). Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press.
Foreman, M. (2012). Presentation: Approaching the Question of God's Existence. Lynchburg: Liberty University.
McCloskey, H. J. (1968). On Being an Atheist. Question, 51-54.
Russell, Bertrand. “Why I Am Not a Christian,” in Introduction to Philosophy. 6th edition. Perry, Bratman, and Fischer. Oxford University Press. 2013, pp. 56-59.
Russell, Bertrand. Why I Am Not a Christian: And Other Essays on Religion and Related
Russell, Bertrand. “Why I Am Not a Christian,” in Introduction to Philosophy. 6th edition. Perry, Bratman, and Fischer. Oxford University Press. 2013, pp. 56-59.
In his article, "On Being an Atheist" Mccloskey gives a few contentions that look to support the non-presence of God, Atheism. This he does utilizing a few cases made by theists on a general level and in addition centering all the more on the Christian God. The cases are isolated into a few segments whereupon he lays his countering contentions. At the presentation, he gives a concise review of the contentions exhibited by theists, who he alludes to as "confirmations," guaranteeing that none of the evidences make enough avocation to accept that God does exist. Despite the fact that one of the verifications may not indicate the presence of God, all the evidences together give a solid confirmation to the presence of God acknowledging their accord or absence of disagreement. In any case, if the presence of God is focused around such demonstrates, his verifications or complaints that God does not exist are questionable, too.
Hahn, Scott and Benjamin Wiker. Answering The New Atheism. Steubenville: Emmaus Road Publishing, 2008. Print.
William Lane Craig is not the original creator of this argument. It was originally created by Ilm al-Kalam, but Craig is a modern philosopher that has restored this argument. In this argument, Craig asserts that the reason the universe exists is because God created it. This cosmological argument is unique because all other variations of cosmological arguments show that the universe has always existed and has an infinite past. The first premise states that “everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of existence” (Philosophy of Religion). The second premise says that the existence of the universe has a beginning which means its past is not infinite (Philosophy of Religion). From these two premises, we can conclude that something created the universe and if something caused the universe to exists, then it had to be caused by God. These two conclusions prove that God does exists. This argument implies that the universe does not have an infinite past. Even though it doesn’t directly say that the universe has a beginning, it can be proven mathematically by showing that infinity cannot exists.
... uses the lack of proof of Gods existence for God’s existence. This then essentially leads to a battle between science and religion on the idea of whether or not God can be proven to exist and whether that proof is essential to determine if science or religion has the right answer.
McCloskey dives right into the meat of his article by addressing what he refers to as “proofs” he claims were put forth by theists. I think that it is imperative to know the difference between a “proof” and an argument. A proof contains a note of certainty. It suggests that something can be known to be 100% truth. In one of the recent PointCast presentations, Dr. Foreman insists that we cannot know any with a complete certainty that we have absolute truth about the existence of God. Therefore these ideas should be put forth as arguments and not as proofs. In fact, if looking at it the other way, he cannot know for certain that his ideas are correct. If he uses his rebuttals to the theist’s arguments, they seem contradictory several times. As we have no absolute certainty for either side, we are left then to find the best possible explanation. This is widely used in cases where things simply cannot be known for certain such as the example of the black hole that Dr. Foreman used. Science can’t fully expl...
Furthermore, he brings religion into his arguments. He defines God as an invisible being that we cannot fully understand but accept as the creator of the universe, which is true as it is the definition of God. But he wrongly believes that the question of origin requires us to believe in the existence of God, because atheists also have their own theory on origin, even if they do not believe in God. There are multiple actual examples taken from different religions about how God created the universe. The writer claims that many of the...
First off, The Cosmological Argument was developed by St. Thomas Aquinas in 1274 through his work entitled Summa Theologica (otherwise known as Five Ways). Its purpose was to prove God’s existence through sensory perception. In Part One, Article Three of Prima Pars, Aquinas states that in order to debate, one must become involved in the opposing argument, then afterwards argue their view. In this case, one must look at both the argument for God’s existence (Theism) and for God’s non-existence (Atheism) in order to truly understand the argument that they are arguing for or against. The cosmological argument is divided into three parts, each containing varying sub-arguments:
Migliore, Daniel L. Faith Seeking Understanding: An Introduction to Christian Theology. 2 ed. Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans Pub Co, 2004.
Martin, Michael. ""A Disproof of God's Existence" by Michael Martin." Secular Web: Atheism, Agnosticism, Naturalism, Skepticism and Secularism. Internet Infidels. Web. 12 Oct. 2011.
The existence of God is quite controversial issue. God has different names in the world, and a lot of people, strongly believe in his existence. While, on the other hand, there are also people who don’t believe in his existence. In their discussion entitled “Does God Exist?” William Lane Craig, who is the supporter of the idea of existence of God, debates with Austin Dacey, who is an atheist, on the idea of existence of God. They provide the strong arguments and their debates are quite interesting, and innovative (not similar to those arguments, we usually read about in book). These are the fresh views on the question of existence and non-existence of God.
Fleharty, Carrie. "The Differences between Religion and Faith." Helium. 17 July 2007. Web. 20 Jan. 2012. .
2) Gollwitzer, Helmut. The Existence of God: As Confessed By Faith. Philadelphia: The Westminister Press, 1965