[Serious] Atheist Dogma

[Belacqua]

What he gets wrong is atheism because he paints atheism as knowing there are no gods, so he is arguing that agnosticism is more rational than atheism, because atheism claims to know and agnosticism doesn't. Atheism makes no positive claims.

Here is the definition from Merriam Webster:

Definition of atheism
1a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b : a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods

Lack of belief or strong disbelief.

So, two definitions. One of them you like, the other you don't. 

When you are the emperor of the world, you can issue a command about which is acceptable.

---

Atheism is a lack of belief in a god or gods. 

That's right. That's what I said.

Maybe I am reading this wrong but do you think Atheism is lacking beliefs entirely?

No, I am saying the opposite. It's amazing to me that you'd imagine I've called atheism lacking beliefs entirely. How could you interpret such a wildly different meaning from what I've said?

I am very explicit in what I say: atheists have beliefs (=things we hold to be true). It is these beliefs which support and maintain the lack of belief in God. Therefore, atheism is not simply purely only lack, in the way that stones have a lack. It is a lack based on belief.