For example, we've seen on this thread the definition that atheism means lack of belief in God. That definition rules out my position that atheists can possibly believe in God.
If a person believes in god, by definition, they are not an atheist.
If you choose to define an atheist as a person who does not believe in God, then you arrive at your preconceived destination. Ruling out other definitions ensures that you get to where you want to go.
I think you are missing the point. Several people in this thread, including I have told you that they don't believe in a god, and that they call themselves atheists based on this lack of belief. At the end of the day, it is their worldview, their lack of belief in god that is important, not necessarily what they choose to call themselves.
Most people here appear to understand what the word atheist means, and how they define their own position in the matter of their personal lack of belief in god, but you seem determined to not listen to them and run with the script playing in your own head. A script that is apparently based in an alternate reality where up means down and atheist means theist.
But why don't you accuse those who disagree with me of doing the same? You could just as easily assert that they don't define atheism properly and that they have scripts based in "alternate realities."
I have read the thread, and what I see is a lack of communication, and I place most of the fault for this lack of communication with you. I, and others have told you that we don't believe that gods exist, but you keep insisting that they do believe, that their word is not to be trusted. You have also told us that it is appropriate for people who do believe in gods to call themselves atheists. The point of language is communication, and you don't seem to be good at it. That is my observation.
In other words, my opponents attempt to win the debate with a definition that makes their position true!
There is no winning a debate in which one party refuses to accept commonly accepted definitions of words.
But there is more than one commonly accepted definition of atheism as I have documented on this thread. You are oversimplifying. I say keep an open mind and be willing to accept disagreement. I had enough of narrow, dogmatic, exclusionary thinking when I was a theist, and it's no more acceptable to me when it comes from atheists.
People who believe in gods do not call themselves atheists. At least that has been my experience. And people who don't believe in gods and call themselves atheists are not being dogmatic when they insist that they don't believe.
I've already conceded that "pure" atheists can exist. I can't rule them out. But I cannot wisely accept as true the mere words of those who insist they have no beliefs in God(s) at all. I gave up believing everything I was told when I was a theist!
The fact that you choose to not believe what people keep telling you about their personal convictions...
I made no such choice. I don't have all the facts regarding what I was told, so for now I reserve judgment.
You have made a choice. You have chosen to believe that many of the people telling you that they don't believe in gods may be lying. And I suggest that says more about your state of mind than those you choose not to believe.
speaks more about you than it does them.
Why am I an issue here? You're engaging in an ad hominem fallacy.
you appear to be using this thread as some sort of misdirected rant where you flail around and make a public scene as you try to work through your own complex on this subject.
If you don't like the thread, or you don't like me, then you can leave the thread any time. Just don't ruin it for others.
I would suggest getting professional help to work through this complex.
I see doctors as needed, and I work diligently to maintain my health. After all, if I don't do so, then who else will inject some reason into an otherwise unreasonable forum?
While this forum might be free, people here are not professional therapists, and are probably not looking at your posts as a therapist would in a one-on-one counseling session.
They appear to me to be working hard to hold on to their pet ideas and finding ways to eliminate all doubters.
Which takes us full circle: Theists do that too when their beliefs are being scrutinized.
Telling a self-professed atheist that he may be lying and that he is being dogmatic simply because he insists that the statement is true is not scrutiny, its just a way to be contrary and call people liars. Especially when multiple people are telling you the same thing. Like I said, a plain reading of this thread has led me to believe that you are conflicted about your own worldview, and keep projecting this conflict on to others. It is also possible that you are being contrary for the fun of it - I can't say for sure.