God In H. J. Mccloskey's On Being An Atheist

Theists and atheists have long debated some of the most fundamental questions that we as humans ask about life and God. Is there a God? If there is then what proof do we have that he exists? And one of the biggest and most hotly debated questions is that posed by what has been called the problem of evil: If God does exist then why and how is there evil in the world? Such questions cannot be answered simply and may never be fully resolved on all sides of the argument. However, they are still well worth discussing and examining as a means of understanding what we believe and why. In his article entitled “On Being an Atheist,” H.J. McCloskey presents some common arguments posed by theists in favor of the existence of God and proceeds to

McCloskey says that if a perfect, all-powerful and wholly good God exists, then he would not have created a world in which unavoidable suffering and evil exist. This argument can be a very difficult one to tackle from a theistic point of view, but there are numerous possible explanations for how a perfect and all-powerful God can allow evil in the world. First of all, it is not necessary to accept the idea that a good and perfect being cannot allow evil. What if the existence of some evil allows for a greater good to result? If there is no evil than this greater good might not be made possible. Also, the existence of evil allows for a standard of what is good and right to exist. If there were no evil then there would be no standard by which good could be established and recognized. Perhaps God in his infinite wisdom allows evil to exist so that what is good can be accomplished and displayed. Another theistic defense against the problem of evil is the free will theodicy. This states that evil exists because God has given man free will, and, as such, the evil that exists is due to man’s misuse of his God-given free will. McCloskey opposes this view by asking, “might not God have very easily so have arranged the world and biased man to virtue that men always freely chose what is right?” (McCloskey). The problem with this, however, is that if God

He presents the argument that it is far more discouraging to believe in a God who allows horrible things to happen than it is to simply believe that there is no God. If one is facing the death of a loved one he argues that there is no comfort to be found in belief in God knowing that it is ultimately God who caused the suffering or at least allowed it to happen. This overall conclusion that atheism is more comforting than theism, though, cannot be so simply accepted. This idea must be examined from a broader sense. In his article “The Absurdity of Life Without God,” William Craig explains how there is ultimately no purpose and value to life without the existence of God. It is God’s existence that gives our lives any real purpose and value, and, consequently, it would be far more discouraging to resign oneself to a meaningless existence without God than to hold to belief in God in spite of difficult situations that happen in life. Therefore, the claim that atheism is more comforting than theism is far from indisputable, and it seems that, in a broader sense, the converse actually holds more validity