Mccloskey Claim Of Atheism

To reply to McCloskey’s claim that there could not be a God due to the amount of evil there is I would first acknowledge this claim. At first I too agreed with this claim that how could someone so great and loving let so much evil and pain into the lives of people who do not deserve it. Simply because I did not understand how God could be so great and let evil into this world. Since then certain truths about theology have been explained to me so I can understand the good of God verses the evil found in this world.

According to Craig (2008) he indicated that both man and universe is doomed to death if God does not exist. Ultimately this mean that all human beings would have no purpose or significance, and honestly what is so comforting about not have any value? “If God does not exist, then all we are left with is despair” (Craig, 2008, p.77). Theism is directed towards a purpose-filled and happy life with value were as the worldview of an atheist does not. This brings a comparison of comfort and purpose in the world of God’s existence since the atheist is forced to reason this argument, which makes a valid case that McCloskey argument isn’t valid anymore (Craig,2008). It’s hard to believe that one can find comfort without an existence of God because without God’s existence life would be without significance and value (Craig,2008,

In 1968 H.J. McCloskey wrote an article for the journal Question called “On Being an Atheist.” He presents three arguments for why his belief in atheism is more comforting than theism. He regards the arguments as “proofs” and intends to prove the inadequacy of each proof. By comparing the three proofs separately and then together he is able to provide different angles which enables new thoughts. While the proofs don’t stand strong by themselves the three together persuade the argument that there is a specific Creator, or Christian God. As a Naturalist struggles without explanation McCloskey struggles to comprehend the reason so many put their faith in someone they can’t fully understand. Through evaluating each proof thoroughly McCloskey is

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.

HJ McCloskey is a proclaimed atheist. He presents lots of arguments including the belief of why there is no God. He also says that atheism is a more comfortable belief. He states that it is impossible for a higher power to create an imperfect world. McCloskey thinks that even if there was a maker than how can people be comforted by Him instead of blaming him for creating an imperfect world with evil and imperfections.

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. According to McCloskey, proofs do not necessarily play a vital role in the belief of God.  Page 62 of the article states that "most theists do not come to believe in God as a basis for religious belief, but come to religion as a result of other reasons and factors."  However, he feels that as far as proofs serve theists,

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.

Some say Atheism is a moral issue but in an Atheist’s perspective, it is discrimination. A deity often represents morals and meaning, according to those who believe in them. With the lack of a supreme being, it creates the idea that Atheists lack moral. This creates a false view of Atheists being unethical. This idea towards Atheism is often used to persecute Atheists. For instance, a message saying “ATHEISTS, AGNOSTICS AND NON BELIEVERS ARE THE TRUE CRIMINALS OF THE WORLD COMMUNITY” was posted on a Christian-based website called http://www.tencommandments.org. This type of attitude towards Atheism is often found in Christians because of of their

Therefore, the only reason one has to behave ‘morally’ is because god, the bible or Jesus says you should. Moreover, the consequences of behaving in contradiction to Christian values or behaving ‘immorally’ involve punishment by god whether it be in this life or the after-life. This philosophy sheds some light on why atheism is feared, despised and misunderstood as well as why atheists are persecuted in America. If there is no god to answer to or no consequences for ‘bad behavior’, why then, would anyone behave in a good moral fashion? What is to prevent deviant behavior, if there is no god? These questions are the main basis for the Christian argument which maintains that atheists are untrustworthy, immoral or amoral, social deviants and therefore lesser human beings. Some have gone as far to say that atheists are unpatriotic, un-American and do not even have the right to be acknowledged as citizens of the United States.

People within multitudes of societies are constantly searching for fulfillment in life. Many look towards an omnipotent God for guidance and security. Some might claim that without a purpose, there would be no reason to have morals in the first

form of moral nihilism arises. ”Without God ... everything is permitted now.”[1] That is, if

The three scholarly articles I read on atheism had numerous differences and similarities. Each article focused on a different idea or problem involving atheism, but there were numerous similarities regarding the authors’ opinions on atheism. The main difference in all three academic sources was the main focus of each academic source. The first article focused on whether or not atheism should be considered a religion and the evolution of the definition of religion (Davis 707-723). The second article focused on the importance of the politics of atheism in our understanding of what it means to be an atheist (LeDrew 464-469). Finally, the third article focuses on disproving Paul Ricoeur’s interpretation on atheism (Amini 7-13). Although all three articles are different, they present similar and different ideas on how we, as a society, view atheism and what it means to be an atheist.

The belief that morality requires God remains a widely held moral maxim. In particular, it serves as the basic assumption of the Christian fundamentalist's social theory. Fundamentalists claim that all of society's troubles - everything from AIDS to out-of-wedlock pregnancies - are the result of a breakdown in morality and that this breakdown is due to a decline in the belief of God. This paper will look at different examples of how a god could be a bad thing and show that humans can create rules and morals all on their own. It will also touch upon the fact that doing good for the wrong reasons can also be a bad thing for the person.

While atheists do not believe in God, it does not mean that they do not serve a god and religion. Capitalism, at least in America, is everyone’s religion. It is served each and every day as millions make the pilgrimage to work, to gain the capacities to tithe into the economy by following the ever present sermon of buy, buy, buy. The sermon is far greater than any religion of God, for it is sought out daily by various means such as the television, radio, and advertisements on clothes that society themselves perpetuate. Martin Luther once stated that “one’s religion is whatever one is willing to sacrifice his children for is his religion and God”. Millions are being sacrificed by their economies today; workers are working 12 hour days for less than 2 dollars. Governments are doing all in their powers to keep unions from forming all in the name of capitalism. Therefore if Harris’ argument is that only morality can be accomplished by atheism, and there is no true form of Atheism, then there can be no true form of morality(religion of the market 67-70).

Religion in the world has always been considered a rather important aspect of society. Although this is true, there are still people that question the existence of God. A survey done among 1000 people showed that 65 percent of Americans believe that religion is losing its influence on American life (Sheler, 8). Even so, Belief in a God is necessary for a moral society because since the beginning of history man has always made up some sort of role model to explain events and situations that seem inexplicable, God gives people a sense of comfort and hope to know they aren’t alone, and when a society believes in a God, there is a religion behind it that gives ethics and values that they must