This is sort of a hijack and sort of an attempt to define the terms of the OP.
I read the FAQ at the site Derleth linked to above. As I see it they are arguing semantics and when they back themselves into a corner they end up denying the existence of, if not any god, at least denying the existence of all specific gods mentioned.
Also, this is a limited group of people who have decided to call themselves Atheists (note the capital) and also to redefine the term which existed before they existed. Thus Derleth says that the dictionary definition is not
“in the modern sense”. I call myself an atheist too but I use the definition as it has been used for a long time. When they start talking about Atheism meaning “free from theism” they don’t follow through to say that theism means belief in god. Instead they say that theism means religion and so this is “freedom from religion”. If you’re going to start breaking the word down into pieces, why stop halfway?
There’s the whole semantic issue of whether or not you “believe” in a tree. Well, let’s say it another way. I acknowledge the existence of the tree that I can see through the window here where I sit. I do not acknowledge the existence of the hypothetical tree that my hypothetical friend says exists five feet to the left (I can see that spot and there is no tree there). Also, I deny the existence of god, as I can not perceive one. If someone wants to say, “God is the forces of the universe such as gravity.” Well, ok I’ll acknowledge that such forces exist, but now you’re redefining the word “god”.
They do, sort of, admit to denying the existence of god by saying that they can prove by scientific process that there never has been one like any that religions have as yet proposed.
So it all comes down to semantics, which is essentially the understanding of words, which is what the people who wrote the dictionary know about. To get at what the dictionary means you need to keep looking up all the words in the definitions until you find you understand each word fully. Because the people you point me toward are understandably worried about everyone’s definition of the word ‘god’, they can’t just accept the dictionary definition the way it is written. So, instead, they dance around the issue. I would rather see them define the term and then deny it.
Do we have to go through very carefully defining each of these loaded words? Maybe we do.
Let me give a few of them a try. I already gave you Atheist and Agnostic. I think the most difficult one is Believe. Here goes. From the dictionary I quoted above.
believe - “1. To accept as true or real 2. To credit with veracity 3. To have confidence in the truth, value, or existence of something” …There’s more but it relates to having doubts, like “I believe you’re going to continue to stand by your statement that an atheist does not deny the existence of a god.”
I’m OK with this definition. The problem comes when looking up “belief” because the word faith comes up as well as trust and confidence. This gets a little messy. I believe that one of the aforementioned trees exists but do I have faith in the tree? No. I have faith that if I were to try to walk rapidly through the tree I would hurt myself. When you are careful with your grammar as well as your vocabulary these words can still work. An Atheist may have faith in the consistency of scientific knowledge. The only reason they have to believe that gravity will go on working as it always has is that up to now it hasn’t changed. That does not prove that it won’t fail tomorrow but I have faith that it will go on as always.
So, let me define faith from my own head and you can see how well this coincides with your own definition, or the dictionary’s definition if you prefer.
Faith - 1. Confidence, without undeniable proof, in the accuracy of or existence of something. 2. Confidence in the performance of someone or something.
Thus, I have a strong faith that football exists and a slightly lesser faith that the Redskins will beat the Ravens in the Superbowl.
What else should I define? Never mind. You take a try at a few or give me new definitions of the ones I gave you. I still say an atheist denies the existence of god, especially any specific God or gods. And I include in my definiton of atheist the person or persons who wrote the FAQ you pointed me toward.
I suggest you define the word “god” for a start. If you give a sufficiently broad definition, I will retract my statement about denying a god. But, I will instead be forced to point out that most people have a narrower definition of the word. If you have little trust in your proof that the christian god does not exist, then you are probably an agnostic. I submit that the difference between an agnostic and an atheist is that the atheist is more confident of their logic. Do you believe that the sun will rise tomorrow? I do. If you’re thinking about arguing about the possibilty that it won’t happen, you’re not ready to be an atheist. I admit that events could possibly, in the next few hours, occur to destroy the world or whatever. But they won’t. I have faith. I am an atheist.