some might have followed the path and example of Belgian priest and scientist George Lemaître

Being deists, they had already rejected the notion of a personal creator like yours.

Obviously not, but you are entitled to your feeling on this matter.

It's kind of what the word means, dude.

LOL, don't you ever get tired of humiliating yourself? I mean, I hope not, because it sure is fun to watch.

If I remember correctly, it is at the end of "The Age of Reason". Of course, this same book was vehemently criticized by religious people, even though many of its conclusions match the conclusions of modern scholars. I think Teddy Roosevelt called Paine "a filthy atheist".

When Thomas Jefferson was running for President, there were those who called him an atheist, but he won anyway.

I may have been 10 at the time. Later I learned a few things, and as you/wiki suggest, Atheism/Agnosticism became compelling.

mingling has done through out history and they knew there was no way that a country could stand a chance if separation of church and state were a primary factor in the country.

All the so called "Christians" have never heard of Deists or what they were or what they stood for, basic civics 101.

When neither of those positions can be proved.

I am an agnostic, a person with an open mind. Neither one of those two former positions have an open mind.

Both of those groups have closed minds.

That is a concept at the center of science.

That would mean belief should be clearly centered on disbelief until demonstrated otherwise. The burden of proof is on the theists, those who make so many various conflicting claims on their various deities.

Atheism is a comfortable alternative, deferring to demonstrable facts under controlled conditions. If someday theists get together -- and stop killing each other -- and offer some testable hypotheses, I'll be all over making the appropriate experiments.

Until then, the null hypothesis is the one which is operative.

Agnostics don't know

I call myself an atheist because, although I attended church for the first 13 years of my life, I never believed any of it because there simply no evidence outside of the religious texts, which is all hearsay.

My church was Congregational and it was located in the midst of one of the largest Jewish enclaves in Detroit. The synagogue next door to the church shared a parking lot between them. On Christmas Eve, the Rabbi from next door would traditionally give the sermon; one of our pastors would reciprocate at the synagogue on one of their holy days.

So I learned two important things about religion quite early in my life. First, people with different beliefs don't need to kill each other. Second, since there are so many different beliefs, not all of them can be correct, and actually it's more than likely that none of them are correct.

That is very comforting to me, especially as there are still too damned many who believe that murder is justifiable for such beliefs. We'd all be better off either letting it all go, or being more like that pastor and rabbi of my youth.

Believing there is no god is not the same as knowing there is no god. Most atheists are also agnostics.

Definition of atheist
:a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods ne who subscribes to or advocates atheism

Definition of theism
:belief in the existence of a god or gods; specifically :belief in the existence of one God viewed as the creative source of the human race and the world who transcends yet is immanent in the world

Definition of agnostic
1 :a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (such as God) is unknown and probably unknowable; broadly ne who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god
2 :a person who is unwilling to commit to an opinion about something

political agnostics

Belief/disbelief are binary. You either believe something or you do not; there is no middle ground. While "reserving judgement" might appear to be a softer third option, it is functionally consistent with disbelief.

It's a term that describes knowledge.

(A)theism describes a belief state.

You can believe in a god, and claim to KNOW it exists - that makes you a gnostic theist.
You can believe in a god, but not claim to know it exists - you're an agnostic theist.
You can NOT believe in a god, and claim to know that gods don't exist - you're a gnostic atheist.
And finally, you can NOT believe in a god, and NOT claim to know they don't exist, and you're an agnostic atheist. (Likely what you are.)

The terms are complementary, not exclusionary.

wrote a book about it

I wonder if they are teaching that now, or if teachers have been intimidated into skipping that part of our history.

.... reason be damned, facts be damned