Response To Mccloskey
Response to McCloskey’s “On Being and Atheist” I respect individual worldviews, as I desire people to respect mine. At the same time, I do have the freedom of agreeing or disagreeing with ones that are deviate in nature from my own. One prime example is the worldview of H. J. McCloskey. Although I respect his worldview, and understand his reasoning behind it, I also disagree with it as well. McCloskey’s views are one of an Atheist. I am a Christian, and consider myself a theist who believes in an all-powerful God.
The Existence of God
In my opinion, I believe that McCloskey’s arguments against the existence of God is somewhat biased. By biased I’m inferring that his argument is a one-sided view that attempts to provide proof that God doesn’t exist based on man-made judgments about what an all-powerful, omniscient being can, should, or would do. I conclude that this is unreasonable because as mere humans, we don’t have the capability to understand the magnitude or reasoning of God. Who are we to determine what The Creator should do in any circumstance? That is not our position as humans to do this for God. Preoccupied with what an all-powerful …show more content…
The standard of indisputability is reasonable in my opinion. However, there remains the question of what is the measure of indisputability that McCloskey is referring to? Does this mean that no one can argue with the examples that already exist in the world that prove God’s existence? Does it imply that examples should be obvious and evident truths about things that are in existence? To do so would actually hurt his own case. I say this because the examples of what we have in nature by God’s revelation such as trees, air, and life-forms with the ability to reproduce would definitely harm his own case. For these examples are examples of an intelligent being capable of creating complex organisms. Therefore, I believe that it is reasonable to consider examples of design and
The Existence of God
In my opinion, I believe that McCloskey’s arguments against the existence of God is somewhat biased. By biased I’m inferring that his argument is a one-sided view that attempts to provide proof that God doesn’t exist based on man-made judgments about what an all-powerful, omniscient being can, should, or would do. I conclude that this is unreasonable because as mere humans, we don’t have the capability to understand the magnitude or reasoning of God. Who are we to determine what The Creator should do in any circumstance? That is not our position as humans to do this for God. Preoccupied with what an all-powerful …show more content…
The standard of indisputability is reasonable in my opinion. However, there remains the question of what is the measure of indisputability that McCloskey is referring to? Does this mean that no one can argue with the examples that already exist in the world that prove God’s existence? Does it imply that examples should be obvious and evident truths about things that are in existence? To do so would actually hurt his own case. I say this because the examples of what we have in nature by God’s revelation such as trees, air, and life-forms with the ability to reproduce would definitely harm his own case. For these examples are examples of an intelligent being capable of creating complex organisms. Therefore, I believe that it is reasonable to consider examples of design and