The whole question is quite meaningless whilever we are unclear about the word "god" and its meaning. The damn word keeps getting in the way depending on how it is defined I could be either agnostic, religious or atheist. If you think that is wimping out, come over here and get a good slapping, sunshine.
All I can do is try and re-state my own understanding.
I do not have any beliefs or faith in a personal god of any description.
I do not - can not - accept that we are created or controlled by an external puppetmaster. There is therefore no theistic entity in my understanding.None. No doubt, no question. I am therefore atheist
I do, however, see the universe as one conscious entity, with the consciousness schized and shared among the life forms that make it up - i.e. the universe is constantly experiencing itself through individual consciousnesses but is not external to the process and does not have any mechanism to interfere supernaturally. However, individuals can expand their consciousness and lose the sense of separateness that makes them battle and use the universe as a whole and gives them the illusion of a separate immortal soul. If you think that is a belief in god, and atheism is a belief in no god, then you may choose, erroneously, to call me a non-atheist. The beliefs would all be your own, however. My understanding is based on observation and not on faith or belief.
My agnosticism is that I have no beliefs, so I accept that my experiences of the world may be entirely illusory, for though my perception of the universe as one-ness is as real as my perception of the mundane world I inhabit, there is no way of telling for certain whether the universe we know is real in an absolute sense or illusory in some greater context, and by context I mean that all our experiences, measuring equipment, mathematics and knowledge are bounded by our current reality model, by the physicality of what we know. The alternative is of a very low order of probability but it would be irrational to say that there was no possibility. In essence, though we have a workable reality model
That reality model certainly has no place or use for any God though most people are quite happy to live with the notion of "self". The self is just an aggregate of beliefs, a point of view abd prejudices and is as transitory and illusory as the shape of a stream of water. It is the vessel for faith, an abomination which serves to strengthen the illusion. It is essential for a theist to have this notion of "self" - a separate existence, a soul - which is projected, magnified, warped and morphed onto the deity of his choosing. AS I do nor subscribe to the egocentric viewpoint, I cannot be a theist. If I am not a theist, I am atheist. If you think my other statements classify me as a deist (I don't think they do) then a lot dependsd on whether not your definition of atheist included deism.
It has been stated on this thread that it is simply a case of belief/not belief in god. Without an absolute definition that is a very glib, naive dismissal, tantamount to asking someone what kind of apples their oranges are and insisting on an answer only in those terms.