Some people in the religious (and some in the agnostic) community have been going on a crusade to redefine atheism from “a lack of belief in god/s” to “the belief that no god/s exist”. This is fallacious from the start because:
1) Atheism comes from the Greek words “a”-without and “theos”-god. Without god. While some atheists do believe that there is no god, it is not a requirement to do so. In order to be without god, you just need to not believe in god/s.
2) It’s a lot easier to pretend that your opponents beliefs are faith-based and insupportable than facing up to the burden of proof that you give yourself when you make claims.
But for the sake of argument let’s just say that officially atheism is “the belief that no god/s exist”. If two people, one believing no god/s exist and the other being unconvinced were to debunk every theistic claim put to them, it really wouldn’t matter what their beliefs were. It would just show that theistic claims consistently collapse under critical scrutiny, have no evidence backing them up and are not backed up by logic or evidence. Theists who fixate on strong atheists are really just trying to distract attention from their real problem: that their claims have no valid foundation.
Dear Agnostic People Across The World,
You are awesome people. You are kind and loving people. You also think critically (most of the time). I will give you credit, you actually admit you don’t know.
But I digress, you do not hold a valid theological position. You answer the epistemological question which is “Do we know?” (or “Can we know?”). You can not use “I don’t know” as a theological answer. I’m not good at articulating my thoughts (yet strangely I have a blog) so, I will leave you all to look at this image: