Dear atheist comunity: If an atheist is someone who LACKS a belief concerning God's existence?

Also an atheist. One who doesn't play silly semantic games.

Edit: yes, it is a silly semantic game. As you yourself admit , the only, or at least principal reason to phrase it that way is to relieve yourselves of whatever requirement you think people are under to provide evidence for their beliefs. Problem is, that requirement is made-up and completely arbitrary. Either everyone has that onus, or no one does. Personally I do not see why anyone has to justify their beliefs to anyone else unless they are using a particular belief to advocate for public policy. Otherwise, it's none of anyone's business.

Furthermore, do not try to tell me that atheism is not a belief. 100% of atheists who use that silly, "I'm not making any claims, I just lack belief," line are perfectly happy to state positively that god doesn't exist, is a fairy tale, etc. in every other context except the one where they are asked to provide evidence and/or proof. Then it's, "Oh, I never said God didn't exist! It's theists' responsibility to prove he does!" Bulls**t. Yes you did, and no it isn't.

An atheist IS someone who believes God does not exist.

You can't really lack a belief concerning God's existence- you either believe he exists or that he does not.

(And before you mention agnosticism, agnostic means you claim you do not KNOW if God exists. If you are an agnostic atheist you claim not to know if he exists but don't believe he does not because there is no evidence. If you are a gnostic atheist you claim to know that God does not exist and therefore don't believe. Most atheists are agnostic and most theists are gnostic (claim they know for a fact that God exists)

EDIT: oh yes, you are right, you can lack a belief about God's existence if you've never thought about or been exposed to the idea of a God (ie. newborn babies). I would call that being irreligious.

That would be a "strong atheist." A weak atheist is someone who lacks belief. A strong atheist is someone who makes the positive claim that he/she believes no god exists. Here's where it gets a little complicated: all atheists are weak atheists. Some just take it a step further and are also strong atheists. It makes sense because someone who claims to believe god does NOT exist also lacks belief that one DOES exist.

Gnosticism is not an oxymoron. It is simply KNOWING whether there is a god. It is the position that we can know whether a god exists. So a gnostic atheist is someone who KNOWS whether a god exists and doesn't BELIEVE any sort of god exists.

This is where the terms 'agnostic' and 'gnostic' come in.

Most theists are gnostic-theists as they claim knowledge of the existence of god/s.

Most atheists are agnostic-atheists as they do not believe in god/s but do not claim to know that one doesn't exist.

An atheist who claims to know that god/s do not exist would be a gnostic-atheist.

Simple stuff.

Disagree reasonably. Putting forward that there aren't any unicorns (for apparent motives) is equal to readily lacking a notion in them. Any why? In view that unicorns are an inherently ludicrous notion. Otherwise, why not be given the concept that they're actual? When you consider that they are simply that ludicrous. It is at first religious fundamentalism that attempts to divide unbelievers this manner, into lack of awareness "has in no way heard the phrase" and misotheism "god haters". You both don't know this God or if you do and don't apply the faith, you ought to hate him. I see declaring there is no god is the common position until fully validated in any other case. And i think the video games some intensely religious people play are creating confusion right here.

A gnostic atheist.

Just like a gnostic unbeliever in vampires will say that vampires 100% do not exist, rather than simply not believing in them. In a similar fashion, a gnostic theist would claim that they KNOW gods exist. Personally I don't think gnosticism is a valid position, but to each their own.

Exactly, there is no evidence of inexistence of gods, vampires and other supernatural beings, by definition. Neither is there evidence of their existence.

Gnostic theists don't believe in organized religion. They believe God speaks directly to individuals.

Agnostics lack belief in God

Atheists do not believe God exists.

Some atheists claim that an atheist is merely someone who lacks a belief in God. However, this is a problematic definition, because by that definition, all babies, all puppies, all cans of beer, are atheists.

And that's not a useful definition. If you're saying your can of Coors Light is your philosophical ally, you need to rethink that.

But, fundamentally, there are indeed two kinds of atheists:

1) Those who have been presented with various religions and have decided they don't make sense; and

2) Those who affirmatively believe there is no such thing as a supernatural realm or human spirituality.

The two categories are distinguishable. The former is called "agnostic atheists" and the latter, "positive atheists."

Don't bother using these definitions outside of yahoo answers, people think atheists are all people who believe that god does not exist, agnostics don't know, and theists believe in god, and no one else exists (not true btw).

An atheist. The God hypothesis has failed beyond all reasonable doubt.

An agnostic lacks a belief in God's existence