One question that I have recently been thinking of is this: Is the answer to the question “Are you an Atheist?” necessarily yes for me? The fact of the matter is, it depends on who is asking it, is it a deist, a theist, a Hindu maybe, a philosopher of religion, or most importantly, myself.
Most of the time the answer is yes, of course because most of the times the person asking the question is a “theist” of Abrahamic religions. Surely “that God is clearly defined, and I do not find it challenging to easily reject it.
However, in the debates that one may have with a theist, one usually hears a different claim. Usually the notion of God that a theist wishes to “prove” turns out to be an equivocation with the notion of a Deistic God, or some God other than what the theist tries to worship. Aside from that fallacy that needs to be pointed out to the theist of a particular religion, the question posed in the beginning of this post becomes relevant here: I do not necessarily reject a Deistic God as strongly as I reject, for example, an Islamic God (Allah, the same as Jehovah).
Don’t get me wrong, I do reject even a Deistic God, since it’s mere name has to depend on the arguments for its existence, and there are no good arguments for that. However, it seems to me that there is a mountain of evidence to actually reject the notion of theistic God(s) of the Abrahamic sort. From the internal inconsistencies within such theology to historical inconsistencies, all accumulate to one result: The existence of such God is a delusion.
This gives way to Ignosticism, the idea that a God needs to be defined in order to be rejected, and “God” should not be equivocated in arguments for or against it. Though none of the gods presented until this day can be acceptable enough, so we are still waiting.