Response to McCloskey’s Article
Shamyra Thompson
Liberty University
Introduction
In the short article On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey discusses several
arguments pertaining to the whether or no there is a God and what one believes to be evil.
McCloskey also refers to the arguments as “proof” as well as implied several times that
they can’t define or establish the existence of God. In the light of Foreman’s comments in
regards to the question of God’s existence, I felt that he addressed the question by
discussing the commonly asked question “Is there a God or if a God exist”. He also
discussed what exactly is evil. He defined good and evil although he shared how to define
them by using …show more content…
I know that it may not seem
true at times that God eliminates evil, but I feel that it is true that God eliminate evil. The
evil that God permits is justified because allowing that evil make possible the
achievement of a greater God or the prevention of a worse evil. (Evans and Manis, pp.
160) From what I’ve already learned about free will, is that most theist incorporate their
views of the free will theodicy by making a souls making theodicy. We as humans make
bad choices when it comes to their freedom. This ends in evil and humans making evil
choices. God gives us all free will and that is why we should not use them
inappropriately. Our free will is freedom that we use to out weigh evil. However God
allows us as humans to act freely so we can be morally responsible since we are freely
capable of doing well.
On Atheism as Comforting
In McCloskey’s article, he claimed that atheism is more comforting than theism.
An atheist who believes that there is not a higher being is his or her choice to believe,
but I feel that one who believes in atheism should consider the existence of God. I really
have a hard time believing that there are individuals who have no faith or believe in
Shamyra Thompson
Liberty University
Introduction
In the short article On Being an Atheist, H.J. McCloskey discusses several
arguments pertaining to the whether or no there is a God and what one believes to be evil.
McCloskey also refers to the arguments as “proof” as well as implied several times that
they can’t define or establish the existence of God. In the light of Foreman’s comments in
regards to the question of God’s existence, I felt that he addressed the question by
discussing the commonly asked question “Is there a God or if a God exist”. He also
discussed what exactly is evil. He defined good and evil although he shared how to define
them by using …show more content…
I know that it may not seem
true at times that God eliminates evil, but I feel that it is true that God eliminate evil. The
evil that God permits is justified because allowing that evil make possible the
achievement of a greater God or the prevention of a worse evil. (Evans and Manis, pp.
160) From what I’ve already learned about free will, is that most theist incorporate their
views of the free will theodicy by making a souls making theodicy. We as humans make
bad choices when it comes to their freedom. This ends in evil and humans making evil
choices. God gives us all free will and that is why we should not use them
inappropriately. Our free will is freedom that we use to out weigh evil. However God
allows us as humans to act freely so we can be morally responsible since we are freely
capable of doing well.
On Atheism as Comforting
In McCloskey’s article, he claimed that atheism is more comforting than theism.
An atheist who believes that there is not a higher being is his or her choice to believe,
but I feel that one who believes in atheism should consider the existence of God. I really
have a hard time believing that there are individuals who have no faith or believe in