A simplified maxim on the subject states "An atheist would say, 'I don't believe God exists'; an agnostic would say, 'I don't know whether or not God exists'; and an ignostic would say, 'I don't know what you mean when you say, "God exists"

I now refer to myself as ignostic when questioned about my beliefs, although when they if  I believe in the god of the bible I will say I am atheist to that god. I found this particularly useful when discussing religion with people at work or whenever someone brings it up. I was asked if I believed in god, my response at first was which one? Then they point to the sky and said "you know god!" I continued the conversation sounding as innocent and naive as possible. Just responding in confusion and asking questions, like "do you mean like Zeus or shiva, or the god of war?" By responding to them in this way I'm able to ask questions and make the individual question their beliefs. It also makes it easier to discuss with people and I don't come off as the big bad atheist guy who hates god. I also realized that the average person who claims to believe in god really doesn't believe in god in a traditional sense. So you have people who say they think god is love, other people who say it's an unknown energy, etc. Sort of like the god of Spinoza or Einstein, it's almost a semantic term to represent the pinnacle or outer limit of human cognition. In those cases I feel like the idea is benign and does little or no harm to the person. Since they don't waste time to pray or believe it(god) takes an active role in their daily life. I take this approach now and in the very least it gets the cogs turning in the persons brain and makes them question things they normally wouldn't.