Deities are undefined
I see you're also perfectly capable of bag arguments. No they're not. They're often vaguely defined, that's entirely different. Several common traits of deities: Superhuman, immaterial, intelligent, powerful beings who somehow take interest in human affairs and are capable of influence them. That's certainly vague, but not "undefined".
So now you're going to try to tell me what I believe or don't and why? Really?
The fact that you identify yourself as atheist and you think it is because it meets certain criteria doesn't automatically makes the definition of atheism logically sound. What you believe or don't believe isn't in discussion here.
It's like saying "you don't have any money, therefore you have money!"
False analogy. I meant nothing like that.
Rational people SHOULD be offended when people make bad arguments about others feelings and ideas and assert knowledge they cannot possibly have.
You're contradicting your own statement. You said that, in spite of not having evidence that I wasn't a zebra, you could confidently know that I wasn't a zebra. By the same logic, I could assert knowledge about others feelings and ideas. You are making yourself a spokesperson for the entire atheist group, something you cannot possibly do. Your logic is flawed here. In any case, it's besides the point. I'm just questioning the logical soundness of the definition of atheism as a "lack of belief due to the lack of evidence for the existence of god". That lack of evidence is grounds for agnosticism. The lack of belief is in itself a belief that grounds itself on the lack of knowledge. What you define yourself as being, is irrelevant to this discussion.
Eden