Works Cited Craig, William Lane. Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, 3 rd Ed., Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books, 2008, 71-90. Evans, C. Stephen., and R. Zachary. Manis. Philosophy of Religion: Thinking about Faith. Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009. Print. Foreman, Mark. “Arguments for God’s Existence.” Liberty University. Video Lecture. McCloskey, H.J. “On Being an Atheist.” Feb 1968. P64-68 PHIL 201 Response Paper Instructions 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. Please note the following parameters for this paper: 1. Your assignment is to read McCloskey’s short article found in the Reading & Study folder in Module/Week 7 and respond to each of the questions below. Your instructor is looking for a detailed response to each question. 2. The response paper is to be a minimum of 1,500 words (not including quotes) and must be written as a single essay and not just a list of answers to questions. 3. The basis for your answers must primarily come from the resources provided in the lessons covering the philosophy of religion unit of the course (Evans and Manis, Craig, and the presentation) and these sources must be mentioned in your paper. You are not merely to quote these sources as an answer to the question—answer them in your own words. 4. You may use other outside sources as well, as long as you properly document them. However, outside sources are not necessary. Each of the questions can be answered from the sources provided in the lessons. 5. While the use of the Bible is not restricted, its use is not necessary and is discouraged unless you intend to explain the context of the passage and how that context applies to the issue at hand in accordance with the guidelines provided earlier in the course. You are not to merely quote scripture passages as answers to the questions. Remember this is a philosophical essay not a biblical or theological essay. 6. While you may quote from sources, all quotations must be properly cited and quotes from sources will not count towards the 1,500 word count of the paper. 7. You may be critical of McCloskey, but must remain respectful. Any disparaging comment(s) about McCloskey will result in a significant reduction in grade. 8. Please note that this paper will be submitted through SafeAssign, which is a plagiarism detection program. The program is a database of previously submitted papers including copies of papers that have been located on the Internet. Once submitted, your paper will.

1. Works Cited
Craig, William Lane.
Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics,
3
rd
Ed., Wheaton, IL:
Crossway Books, 2008, 71-90.
Evans, C. Stephen., and R. Zachary. Manis.
Philosophy of Religion: Thinking about Faith.
Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2009.
Print.
Foreman, Mark. “Arguments for God’s Existence.” Liberty
University. Video Lecture.
McCloskey, H.J. “On Being an Atheist.” Feb 1968. P64-68
PHIL 201
Response Paper Instructions
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. Please note the
following parameters for this paper:
1. Your assignment is to read McCloskey’s short article found

2. in the Reading & Study folder in Module/Week 7 and respond to
each of the questions below. Your instructor is looking for a
detailed response to each question.
2. The response paper is to be a minimum of 1,500 words (not
including quotes) and must be written as a single essay and not
just a list of answers to questions.
3. The basis for your answers must primarily come from the
resources provided in the lessons covering the philosophy of
religion unit of the course (Evans and Manis, Craig, and the
presentation) and these sources must be mentioned in your
paper. You are not merely to quote these sources as an answer
to the question—answer them in your own words.
4. You may use other outside sources as well, as long as you
properly document them. However, outside sources are not
necessary. Each of the questions can be answered from the
sources provided in the lessons.
5. While the use of the Bible is not restricted, its use is not
necessary and is discouraged unless you intend to explain the
context of the passage and how that context applies to the issue
at hand in accordance with the guidelines provided earlier in the
course. You are not to merely quote scripture passages as
answers to the questions. Remember this is a philosophical
essay not a biblical or theological essay.
6. While you may quote from sources, all quotations must be
properly cited and quotes from sources will not count towards
the 1,500 word count of the paper.
7. You may be critical of McCloskey, but must remain
respectful. Any disparaging comment(s) about McCloskey will
result in a significant reduction in grade.
8. Please note that this paper will be submitted through
SafeAssign, which is a plagiarism detection program. The
program is a database of previously submitted papers including
copies of papers that have been located on the Internet. Once
submitted, your paper will become part of the database as well.
The program detects not only exact wording but similar
wording. This means that if you plagiarize, it is very likely that

3. it will be discovered. Plagiarism will result in a 0 for the paper
and the likelihood of you being dropped from the course.
Specifically, you must address the following questions in your
paper:
1. McCloskey refers to the arguments as “proofs” and often
implies that they can’t definitively establish the case for God,
so therefore they should be abandoned. What would you say
about this in light of Foreman’s comments in his “Approaching
the Question of God’s Existence” presentation?
2. On the Cosmological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that the “mere existence of the world
constitutes no reason for believing in such a being [i.e., a
necessarily existing being].” Using Evans and Manis’ discussion
of the non-temporal form of the argument (on pp. 69–77),
explain why the cause of the universe must be necessary (and
therefore uncaused).
b. McCloskey also claims that the cosmological argument “does
not entitle us to postulate an all-powerful, all-perfect, uncaused
cause.” In light of Evans and Manis’ final paragraph on the
cosmological argument (p. 77), how might you respond to
McCloskey?
3. On the Teleological Argument:
a. McCloskey claims that “to get the proof going, genuine
indisputable examples of design and purpose are needed.”
Discuss this standard of “indisputability” which he calls a “very
conclusive objection.” Is it reasonable?
b. From your reading in Evans and Manis, can you offer an
example of design that, while not necessarily “indisputable,”
you believe provides strong evidence of a designer of the
universe?
c. McCloskey implies that evolution has displaced the need for
a designer. Assuming evolution is true, for argument’s sake,
how would you respond to McCloskey (see Evans and Manis pp.

4. 82–83)?
d. McCloskey claims that the presence of imperfection and evil
in the world argues against “the perfection of the divine design
or divine purpose in the world.” Remembering Evans’ comments
about the limitations of the conclusion of the cosmological
argument, how might you respond to McCloskey’s charge about
the teleological argument?
4. On the Problem of Evil:
a. McCloskey’s main objection to theism is the presence of evil
in the world and he raises it several times: “No being who was
perfect could have created a world in which there was avoidable
suffering or in which his creatures would (and in fact could
have been created so as not to) engage in morally evil acts, acts
which very often result in injury to innocent persons.” The
language of this claim seems to imply that it is an example of
the logical form of the problem. Given this implication and
using Evans and Manis’ discussion of the logical problem (pp.
159–168, noting especially his concluding paragraphs to this
section), how might you respond to McCloskey?
b. McCloskey specifically discusses the free will argument,
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?” From what you have already learned about free
will in the course, and what Evans and Manis says about the
free will theodicy, especially the section on Mackie and
Plantinga’s response (pp. 163–166) and what he says about the
evidential problem (pp. 168–172), how would you respond to
McCloskey’s question?
5. On Atheism as Comforting:
a. In the final pages of McCloskey’s article, he claims that
atheism is more comforting than theism. Using the argument
presented by William Lane Craig in the article “The Absurdity
of Life without God,” (located in Reading & Study for
Module/Week 6), respond to McCloskey’s claim.

5. Submit this assignment by 11:59 p.m. (ET) on Monday of
Module/Week 7.
Page 1 of 3
PHIL 201
Response Paper Grading Rubric
Criteria
Levels of Achievement
Points Earned
Good/Excellent
Fair/Competent
Deficient
Content: Development
100 to 120 points
· Major points are stated clearly and are well-supported.
· Content is persuasive and comprehensive.
· Content and purpose of the writing is clear.
· Thesis has a strong claim.
· The audience is clear and appropriate for the topic.
· Supportive information (if required) is strong and addresses
writing focus.
60 to 99 points
· Major points are addressed but clarity or support is limited.
· Content is somewhat persuasive or comprehensive.
· Content is inconsistent (lack of clear purpose and/or clarity).
· Thesis could be stronger.
· Supportive information (if required) needs strengthening or
does not address writing concepts.
0 to 59 points
· Major points are unclear and/or insufficiently supported.
· Content is missing essentials.
· Content has unsatisfactory purpose, focus, and clarity.
· Supportive information (if required) is missing.

6. Content: Organization and Structure
30 to 40 points
· Writing is well-structured, clear, and easy to follow.
· Introduction compellingly forecasts the topic and thesis.
· Each paragraph is unified and has a clear central idea.
· Transitional wording is present throughout the writing.
· Conclusion is a logical end to the writing.
15 to 29 points
· Adequately organized with some areas difficult to follow.
· Introduction needs to provide a stronger gateway into the
writing.
· Some paragraphs lack unity.
· Better transitions are needed to provide fluency of ideas.
· Conclusion is trite or barely serves its purpose.
0 to 14 points
· Organization and structure detract from the writer’s message.
· Introduction and/or conclusion is incomplete or missing.
· Paragraphs are not unified (more than one topic/missing or
inadequate controlling and concluding sentences).
· Transitions are missing.
· Conclusion, if present, fails to serve its purpose.
Form: Grammar and Diction
15 to 20 points
· The writing reflects grammatical, punctuation, and spelling
standards.

7. · Language is accurate, appropriate, and effective.
· Writing’s tone is appropriate and highly effective.
8 to 14 points
· The writing contains some grammatical, punctuation, and/or
spelling errors.
· Language is unclear, awkward or inappropriate in parts.
· The writing’s tone is generally appropriate and moderately
effective.
0 to 7 points
· The writing contains many grammatical, punctuation and/or
spelling errors.
· Language use is largely inaccurate or inappropriate.
· The writing’s tone is ineffective and/or inappropriate.
Form: Format
15 to 20 points
· Writing correctly follows formatting guidelines.
· Parenthetical and bibliographical source citations are used
correctly and appropriately.
8 to 14 points
· Writing follows most formatting guidelines, but some flaws
are detected.
· Parenthetical and bibliographical source citations are
incorrectly formatted or used.
0 to 7 points
· Writing lacks many elements of correct formatting.
· Parenthetical and bibliographical source citations and/or
references are not provided.

8. Total
/200
Instructor’s Comments: