reprise

The "parsimony" aspect of Occam's Razor does not dismiss that which is already known and verifiable.

What evidence are you suggesting is available which suggests that the universe is the result of causality - much less than God is the causal mechanism behind its creation?

And please apply Occam's Razor to God's existence.

Charles Darwin

[PARAPHRASE]Originally posted by tribalbeeyatch
Please re-read BibleHumper's post. Pay particular attention to the first sentence:

"Atheism is not a "belief that God does not exist", it is a lack of belief in any deity(ies)."

I think you'll find that to be the key to unraveling your confusion. [/PARAPHRASE]

I'm afraid that 1st sentence did not help much. How is it that not believing in a god does not entail believing that that god does not exist?

crazyfingers

You do realize that there are very detailed scientific explanations that can be observed elsewhere in the galaxy to explain how the was earth formed. There is a great deal of observational and theoretical evidence for the current theory on how the earth formed. Only religionists believe that the earth "poofed" into existence.

braces_for_impact

You are attempting to make a correlation between atheism, and abiogenesis. Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, and says nothing about where the universe and the world came from. I don't know many atheists that insist the universe "poofed" into existence.I suggest some research into cosmology and abiogenesis. That or admit you speak from ignorance of the subject.

Also earlier you mention Occam's razor which basically says, all things being equal, the simpler explanation is preferred. Which is more complex, the universe being the product of a natural cause, or being created by an all powerful being?

reprise

The deist must believe that the deity of their choice simply "poofed" into existence.

We are not "lightly dismissing this explanatory power" - we are saying there is no evidence to support his particular explanation and that applying Occam's Razor to the origin of the belief in a deity would lead one to conclude that "God" was an concept devised to explain things which at the time of devising could not be explained without resorting to the complex and unnecessary. God is an extremely complex and unnecessary explanation for the existence of the universe, quite apart from being untestable and unverifiable.

Charles Darwin

I'm offering no such evidence -- you are making my point out to be stronger than it was. The purpose of this thread is to discuss the question of whether atheism entails religious beliefs or not. My point was that the existence of God explains our existence, and that competing explanations (egs, the universe poofed into existence, or that it has always existed and is not the result of causality) also require faith. Therefore, among other things, the denial of the existence of God is not tantamount to the denial of the existence of little green men.

Charles Darwin

I'm using the term "world" not to imply the earth but our existence in general.

reprise

God is still a complex and unnecessary explanation for the fact of our existence.

Charles Darwin

If Atheism is a lack of belief in gods, then how can it say nothing about where the universe and the world came from? It, in fact, entails the belief that the universe was not created by God.

I agree that the atheist has more options than poof. He can deny causality, for example (another faith requiring assumption). I'm fairly up to speed on cosmology and abiogenesis, but I'm afraid I'm unclear on how those areas help make atheism free of religious beliefs. Can you clarify? It is not as though cosmology has provided an explanation for how the Big Bang, for example, came about.

crazyfingers

That a "big Bang" of some kind happened some 13 billion years ago is a fact. What kind of events allowed the big bang to happen is simply not known. There are no facts that are known prior to the big bang.

To conclude that it was caused by a one of a kind, infinate creature, is intellectually dishonest.