The problem here is that you listed a bunch of problems you have with the Judeo-Christian God (or at least a conservative interpretation of him), but you pretty much ignored my point about evidence.

No pointed to claims made by believers and used what is listed in their own book that contradicts what that god supposedly is. You said agnostic atheists run away when it comes to the Christians God. I did not run away an supplied logical reasons using the holy book as evidence. I didn't make the definition for the Christian god, believers did. If the God is omniscient but the holy book shows references where the god did not know something, then by definition that god is not omniscient which refute the claim about that god.

I don't care about the semantics between holding something out as an opinion or a fact. Both are claims.

You don't care because words have meaning and they are not the same thing. A claim is asserting something to be true whether or not you have evidence for something. You can have an opinion and not assert that your opinion is true. They are different things,

The null position is not the claim. If you said you have a magical pet dragon It is up to you prove why it exists , not me to provide evidence for my non acceptance of your claim.