@Brain-sama:
Think 'aperiodic', same construction, same literal meaning ("without period"), but it doesn't mean or imply that an aperiodic object does not believe in the existence of periodicity, merely that it does not follow one.
Atheist certainly used to mean "godless" in the way you could be masterless or childless. For instance, why are we 'a-theist' and not 'a-deist'?
Historically, deists were frequently lumped in with atheists (contemporary meaning) and collectively called "atheist" (historical meaning). Hence Thomas Paine (Deist) was (is?) frequently referred to as an atheist, as were many other deists and pantheists of that era. To many a critic, atheist was the label applied to anyone who dared consider that you needn't build churches, pay tithes, pray to God, etc. - what we might call irreligious today - regardless of whether or not their target believed there was even a god to not pray to.
The modern distinction is a philosophical nicety, but a useful one. Really, it doesn't matter if someone calls themself atheist but believes in a personal god, since there is no "supreme court of atheism" that can declare what is or is not atheism. Part of atheism not being a religion is that it has no dogma, and people who say "you can't believe that and still be atheist" speak for no-one but themselves.
Maybe some people have a different idea of what it means to be atheist (though I'm still not convinced it can't just be people ticking the wrong box). We often criticise fundies for not accepting anyone with a differing view of Jesus and the bible is 'truly Christian', which is what the OP was in answer to. Time to step up and take our own medicine.
