Jonathan Drake,
I'm sure it hasn't escaped you that I'm not being apologetic of theism here; I'm saying that atheism makes a claim at least as extravagant as theism and requires an equal, if not larger, amount of evidence to back up such claim.
Also, why is there a necessity to associate a deity with the beginning, development and sustenance of life on earth? What if a deity is something else that we don't understand yet? As per your illustration from the bank: you cannot compare a bank that never existed with a deity whose existence you cannot verify. Sure, if the bank never existed, the story certainly has at least an element of falsity. But the problem with the deity is that you cannot verify empirically neither its existence NOR its non-existence. So, you can lead your life assuming it doesn't exist, sure - but in the realm of metaphisics, you cannot assert anything but: " All we can safely say about God is the evidence of its absence".
Eden