(October 30, 2010 at 3:12 pm)Existentialist Wrote: You can say denial of is encapsulated by lack of, but you can't really lay the law down an force a god-denier to accept the secondary definition, especially as he has already accepted the first.
Just because the 'god-denier' correctly considers himself an atheist does not mean that he cannot accept that his denial is not what makes him one. His lack of belief is what makes him one. His denial is a secondary component to his state of atheism. A 'stronger' atheism than simply lacking belief, as it were.
*laughs*
We've definitely whittled it down to a specific sticking point, but I have no interest in debating it further, as I doubt either of us will be swayed. No offense, I just think we're done here. At least... I am.
