H. J. Mccloskey's On Being An Atheist

In the article presented On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey uses three of the more popular proofs that theists have argued for God’s existence, in an attempt to disprove that there is a God. First he discusses the cosmological argument. The cosmological argument makes an effort to conclude the existence of God from the existence of the cosmos or universe. The arguments are called first-cause arguments. The first-cause points to God being responsible for the “cause” of everything. Something caused the universe to come into existence out of nothing. Some have suggested that the big bang theory proves this point. McCloskey uses some argumentative evidence of evolution to reject this argument by suggesting an uncaused cause of existence, because …show more content…
This argument also acknowledges a supreme being as the creator, but adds the character that is involved in an orderly universe. Philosophy of Religion states, “The teleological argument begins from the fact that the natural world appears to exhibit purposive order or design, and infers that its cause must therefore be an intelligent designer.” McCloskey insists on some of the same reasons for rejecting this argument as stated in the previous argument, but flat out rejects the belief that there is evidence of design and purpose. Disregarding God’s overwhelming design in nature, McCloskey suggests that there must be genuine indisputable examples of design or purpose. And as a result, McCloskey believes one could not legitimately argue that there was an all-powerful designer, and if there was a designer he would most likely be a malevolent imperfect planner because of all the ugliness and evil in the world. McCloskey’s argument seems to be completely focused on this evil world that he lives in. I disagree completely with the premise of McCloskey’s argument. It seems impossible to disregard the proof of God’s design in the world. The apostle Paul says, “For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For his invisible attributes, namely, his eternal power and divine nature have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the …show more content…
He then mocks the analogy of faith offered by the theist, insults God’s works, and concludes that faith in God is foolish. Once again, however, McCloskey uses the fact that there is evil in the world to suggest that God does not exist. In fact McCloskey states, “It is because evil exist that we believe God does not exist.” But McCloskey is disregarding, in a few sentences, the most important proof of God’s existence and that is “faith.” The analogy that the theist gives for faith is good, but having faith in God is special and so much more. It has been said in philosophy that faith is not a reason of proof that God exist. I respectfully disagree because I believe it is “the” reason to believe that God exists. The only way to truly know God is through faith in Christ and faith comes by hearing God’s Word. Through the Holy Spirit, there are spiritual gifts and knowledge that one receives when accepting Christ into their life that one cannot receive outside of God. The reasonable arguments presented in this article offer good points of God’s existence, but each one can be disputed. I believe the arguments can be used as a stepping stone towards an understanding of God, but it is impossible for a person to come to Christ but through faith by the Spirit. Luther’s Small Catechism reads, “By the Gospel the Holy Ghost enlightened me with His gifts, that is, He gave me the saving