God made few perfect heads, the rest He covered with hair.
Maybe that's why guys tend to have hairy butts? Whereas women tend to have less hair or no hair? Pardon me while I hold that thought...
This argument is going nowhere fast because among other reasons, Mike375 is asserting and insisting on using too many definitions of belief and faith based on different standards of usage. The problem is that since they are related, casual and colloquial usage can mean anything in a broad range. But when attempting to do something formal, you must first formally define your terms. Otherwise your arguments are all totally bogus from the start. Poor foundation equals poor structure. Period.
For discussions of philosophy, Faith is one type of belief. Belief includes faith but includes other belief origins besides Faith. Going to a dictionary for EITHER term will show some use of the other for colloquial and casual conversation. And when you allow casual usage to creep in, you are doomed to a circular discussion. Which is often a tactic used by those who wish to religiously confound their debating opponents.
As to atheism and faith, here is how you say it using precise definitions.
Atheists do not have Faith in God because Faith requires belief without proof. Atheists want but cannot get proof. Atheists believe there is no God based on (1) the lack of proof and (2) the availability of simpler origins to explain it all. Theists believe in God AND have Faith in God's existence. Therein lies the distinction that was part of the original question. Theists differ from atheists in the presence of Faith as part of the theists' belief system. Using strict definitions, atheists lack Faith in God.
OK, what is required for each belief system?
To have the God of the Old and New Testaments, you need a supernatural / extradimensional, perfect being whose origin cannot be explained. He is eternal, perfect, all-knowing, all-powerful, etc. He works from the other side of the "great barrier" between life and death.
The biggest question, "Why are WE here?" is always answered in some variant of "God works in mysterious ways." Translation: "We have no clue." And of course, when an ATHEIST answers a question with "We have no clue" then the theists get bent out of shape. Yet it is exactly what they say.
Atheism believes in purely natural forces being the formative forces of existence. To varying degrees and details, atheists are more likely to believe that the Big Bang and Abiogenesis plus balance between gravitational and compression-response forces - plus Evolution - lead to where we are. They think this belief is simpler because all you need is enough time for random encounters to produce something good. Sort of like the "ten million monkeys writing all of Shakespeare's plays" thought experiment. Given enough time, despite low probabilities, it COULD happen and cannot be disproven as a possibility.
Now, let's address something else. The talk of 2 billion people having this belief or that one is dangerous because it substitutes statistics for rational thought. Here's an instant example: Over the course of recorded history, maybe 50 TRILLION flies have eaten dung. They must think it is good. You won't see me joining them for dinner, though.
One more thought: The Big Bang believers (BBBs) don't require "something from nothing." BB theories abound, it is true, but none of the more modern variants actually require "something from nothing." All they say is that due to the maelstrom of the BB scrambling all matter witihin its range, we can never know what preceded the BB. We don't say there was nothing. We say we cannot know because the evidence is destroyed.
Imagine, for example, that a crime was committed on the beach at Bikini Atoll just before the first H-bomb test, and that it was committed directly at "ground zero" of that blast. OK, now send in a forensics team to prove the existence of the crime after the heat of the blast has dissipated. You can't, radiation notwithstanding, because the evidence has been scrambled into unrecognizable components. Atomized, vaporized, destroyed. No evidence.
Well, multiply that by a couple of million or billion or trillion 'cause the BB was supposedly that big. And it scrambled everything. That's why there is point beyond which we cannot look. Not because nothing is beyond that point, but because there is a figurative brick wall past that point.
Back to work... see you later gang.
