Being An Atheist Argument

On Being an Atheist
The existence of God is an ongoing argument between the atheist and the Christian. While the atheist needs undeniable proof that there is in fact an intelligent being that is causally necessary for the existence of everything on earth, Christians argue that one hundred percent certainty may not be possible. Foreman offers four ways to approach this argument: the existence of God is the best explanation for certain effects in the world, we may need to offer more than one argument in order to make our case for God’s existence, it is possible that we are wrong and that a defeater could cause us to adjust our argument, and that we are arguing for the characteristics of the being of God and not necessarily the character God …show more content…
For the atheist, acknowledging the possibility of a necessary being that is the ultimate cause for the universe would suggest that they do, in some respect, acknowledge God’s existence. The cosmological argument states that there must be a first cause for the existence of the universe and that everything in the universe is contingent on that first cause. For Christians, that first cause is God, the creator of the universe and everything in it. McCloskey suggests that the world just happened, the Big Bang possibly, but what caused the Big Bang? If the universe is contingent upon a necessary being and everything in the universe is contingent on that being, why do we have human beings, trees, animals and not something else? If there is no first cause, no necessary being to intervene, then how did humans evolve from slime on a rock into a human being? Further, McCloskey refers to this necessary being as malevolent and a “well intentioned muddler” in an attempt to sway us to agree with his argument. For McCloskey, interjecting the problem of evil into his argument should squash our belief in an all powerful and loving God. Surely the Christian God would not allow evil deeds or events to befall His beloved creation. Again, I feel this is another weak demonstration of the …show more content…
Evolution is the reason that McCloskey believes that there this no evidence of design or purpose. It is difficult to believe that the concept of evolution has negated the idea that everything, including the human being, was designed with a purpose and by an intelligent being. I wonder if McCloskey ever thought about why human beings have five fingers and five toes. Of course he would put forth the argument of evolution, genetics and the like, but if we evolved from ‘slime on a rock’ why don’t we have flippers? The Bible says that mankind is God’s most prized above all creation, created in His image. The process of birth is amazing to me, although I am confident that science can explain away the mystery of this process to satisfy the atheist view. However, can the atheist explain with complete certainty why cells divide at just the right time and the right number of times to create a human being or why the body might reject an embryo because of a certain defect? There surly has to be some kind of intervention by an intelligent designer. Therefore, I believe that the human being is an example of genuine indisputable design and purpose. There are no two human beings that are exactly alike in every aspect. We are all different in one way or another and if McCloskey’s argument were