reprise

I think you're using very strange definitions of "religious belief", "atheist" and "faith".

Based on all the available evidence, I have confidence that barring some extraordinary and unforeseeable event, the Sun will rise tomorrow. That is not the same as having faith that the Sun will rise tomorrow.

Charles Darwin

If God is an unnecessary explanation for the existence of the universe (as Santa is for Xmas presents), then you must have a compelling explanation for existence (just as I have for Xmas presents). Let's hear it.

Regarding the existence of God being untestable and unverifiable, shall I assume that your explanation will be testable and verifiable?

Of course, my points here are rhetorical. I know that you have no such explanations. And that is my point. The atheist position entails religious belief.

Charles Darwin

Can you expand on that? Why is it int. dishonest?

Charles Darwin

I agree that with your distinction between confidence and faith regarding the next sunrise. I fail to see how this relates to existence, and an explanation thereof.

crazyfingers

It utterly short circuites the investigation and jumps to a conclusion that is completely lacking in facts.

Scientists all say that they do not know what brought about the big bang because there are no facts. To conclude that it was a god, lacking any facts, is intellectually dishonest.

Charles Darwin

If there are no facts about how existence came about, and if it is therefore intellectually dishonest to believe that God brought said existence about, then how can it be that it is not intellectually dishonest to believe that God did not bring said existence about?

Similarly, when you say it is "intellectually dishonest" would you agree that it therefore involves faith? Is it not true, then, that atheism also involves faith?

crazyfingers

I have not said that a god didn't do it. I have said that there is no evidence that it did so I don't believe it.

Please remember that most atheists lack of belief in a deity (because the evidence is lacking). Only a few atheists will claim that no deity of any kind exists.

Why does it require faith to lack beleif in something for which there is no evidence?

Does it require faith on your part to have no belief that there exist Giant Green Blob Creatures living in the middle atmosphere of Jupiter? No. There is no evidence so you have no belief in them. That is not faith. That is simply a lack of belief.

tribalbeeyatch

Of course not. An atheist isn't obligated to provide an answer for the question of existence beyond a mere "I don't know". And that doesn't involve anything like 'faith' as I understand the word.

StrictSeparationist

This is simply wrong. I would say that some atheists (myself among them) do not overly concern themselves with exactly what caused the Big Bang. It happened, and now we have the universe. It seems to me that unless your field of study directly concerns the origin of the cosmos, there's no reason to dwell on the events of billions of years ago. They have little relevance to life in contemporary society.

And as to the point that simply because I don't know or care how the universe came into extence, some faith is implied, that's also incorrect. If you'd like, another Santa example, but on a larger scale: I do not believe that it is likely that this universe is actually just a pellet in some enourmous multiversal game of Pac Man. Does this imply that I've made a religion out of that disbelief? Certainly not. So you see, your statement that "it is not so easy to explain existence without God [as it is to explain the appearance of presents Christmas morning without appealing to Santa]" is easily countered with an argument of a similar type, but of much wider scope. Surely you can do better than that?

Charles Darwin

But that is not what the atheist says. Rather, the atheist says: "I don't know, except that I do know that God didn't do it."