Question about atheism related with gnosticism and agnosticism

[Dystopia]

As we all know, gnosticism means 'to have knowledge' while agnosticism means 'an absence of knowledge'. If I am an agnostic atheist, I lack belief in gods but I don't claim to know if there are any. If I'm a gnostic atheist, I don't believe in any gods and claim no gods exist.

My question is, do you have to be fully agnostic or gnostic or can you be partially gnostic and agnostic (regarding atheism)? I'll explain it better, could I claim to be a gnostic atheist regarding religion, by pointing out arguments such as the contradiction between godlike characteristics, lack of evidence to provide validity of holy books, bad things that happen in the world, etc, and use them as evidence to prove all religions are false and their gods are non existent? Therefore I could claim 'religious gods' don't exist. And at the same time could I be an agnostic atheist regarding simple agnostic theism without religious affiliation or deism/pantheism because I really can't proof those propositions are wrong since the deist god doesn't intervene with the world and there are no holy scriptures?

[Welsh cake]

My question is, do you have to be fully agnostic or gnostic or can you be partially gnostic and agnostic (regarding atheism)?

You can be either one, or neither.

Knowledge is ultimately irrelevant to the subject of atheism. To be an atheist, you simply have to have a lack of belief in god or gods.

Therefore I could claim 'religious gods' don't exist.

You can respond to theistic claims as not sufficiently met their burden of proof, or refute them altogether as nonsensical if no good clear working ontology of the deity is provided by the claimer.

[Ravenshire]

I am agnostic about general god claims, deism and such, because there is simply no way to establish their existence or lack thereof. I am gnostic about many specific gawd claims, allah, the christer gawd, et... because they are logical impossibilities.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I am agnostic about general god claims, deism and such, because there is simply no way to establish their existence or lack thereof. I am gnostic about many specific gawd claims, allah, the christer gawd, et... because they are logical impossibilities.

Mazactly.

[ignoramus]

Believing something is bullshit doesn't really need complex abstract concepts.
It's either bullshit or it's not.
If you can't decifer the bullshit sufficiently, you're agnostic.
On a clear Sunday, I love the smell of "bullshit" in the morning.