Does anyone follow the "Way"? ☯

[Dānu]

1: of or relating to an order of existence beyond the visible observable universe, especially of or relating to God or a god, demigod, spirit, or devil.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/supernatural

Deity:

A deity or god is a supernatural being considered divine or sacred.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deity

lol, so now you're fine with dictionary definitions rather than your own usage.

Ummm ... the dictionary definitions are exactly the same as my own usage.

Now, go look up "atheist" in the dictionary. Report back with a link.

The definition is simple; an atheist does not believe in a supernatural deity. 

On the Dawkins Scale, I am a 7. I can make the positive claim that no supernatural deities exist and justify it due to the Evidence of Absence argument. Before anyone is even required to prove the existence of their supernatural deity, they must firstly prove the existence of the supernatural. If they can't do that, their deity cannot be proven to exist.

The state of the deity is supernatural. Therefore, if anyone says they believe in the supernatural, but then says, "God does does not exist," is not a true atheist, and their claim is nonsensical because if they believe in the supernatural, they cannot eliminate the possibility of a supernatural deity existing.

They may be a "de facto" atheist, but not an atheist in the purest sense. They may be a 5 or a 6 on the Dawkins scale, but certainly not a 7.

As long as you believe in the possibility that something supernatural exists, you cannot be certain that God does not exist.

Therefore, you're not fully atheistic.

The evidence for absence argument is an inductive argument, not a deductive one. Therefore, it can reduce the probability that the thing in question exists, but it cannot eliminate the possibility, as that would require a deductive argument. So, by your own admission, you do not eliminate the possibility that the supernatural or a supernatural god exists and are not a "true atheist" either. You think you've eliminated the possibility of the supernatural because you have erred in your logic. You can claim that the supernatural 100% does not exist, but unless that claim is supported by deductive reasoning, it is an irrational belief. I doubt you believe that the definition of an atheist is someone who irrationally doubts the supernatural. So you will need an ontological argument for the nonexistence of the supernatural. I don't know that you don't have one or that one doesn't exist, but I wouldn't be surprised if you don't have one.

The way you've defined atheism leads me to the conclusion that there are likely few or no "true atheists," which suggests your term and its use are not very useful.

The long and short is that the existence of the supernatural is a necessary but not sufficient condition for the existence of a god. So one can concede the supernatural without conceding a god.