'Agnostic/Gnostic/Ignostic'-Please Clarify.
This is fairly simple really.
Before we begin, I believe there are God concepts that we can dismiss without question. There cannot be a material God who is willing to give evidence. There cannot be a God whose existence is knowable by material means. There cannot be a God that is a mountain, or a sea, or anything inanimate. In these cases, we can all be gnostic atheists in this sense, relatively no question there. The problem begins, however, with the question of, "Can there be a God that is in a major organized religion which can be disproven?"
Well, yes and no. One could say that the lack of evidence of a specific God could be the conclusion to this, but it would be a necessity to outline the specifics of the God. I know what you're thinking. "But Jacob, lack of evidence is not evidence of a lack!" Bull****, if you'll excuse my French. If something is intended to be somewhere, and it's been tested multiple times that it isn't, that can conclude that there isn't something. Let me give you an example. Say we have a coin. We flip such a coin. It lands on heads. We flip it again. It lands on heads again. We flip it again. It lands on heads once more. We start to get suspicious. Say we flip it 2,000 times and it still does not land on tails, but heads, every single time. One can safely conclude that this is an only-face-sided coin. We can of course give silly reasons why this doesn't happen, like, "The coin has a plan for life, and it will flip when it chooses to flip, not when you want it to flip," or, "That's only the physical side of the coin, and on the spiritual side it is flipping on tails," but we know these claims are simply not true. We can safely say that this coin, is not a heads-and-tails coin, but an only-face coin. The same can be said for God. If this God is said to interact with the world, and in modern society this God does not interact with modern society at all, it can safely be said that this God does not exist. That is why I am a gnostic atheist about most theistic Gods in religions.
"Well what about a deistic God?" you may ask. There is one problem here. What use would it be to believe in a God that might as well not exist? Nevertheless, the purpose of this is not whether it is useful or not to believe in something or not, but the stance on the knowledge of truth of these claims. So yes, when it comes to such a god/gods, I am an agnostic atheist.
"How about God in general?" You may inquire. I will reply in the most direct way possible. "It is a waste of one's time to have a stance on something that is so vague not one physical, or spiritual for that matter, attributes have been given for such a deity except the basic definition of every deity." This simply means I do not feel that such a concept deserves to have a stance on it. It is way too vague. One must define some key terms and attributes.
So yes, this is the best definition of my stance on Gods.