Good time to point out there is a huge difference between being agnostic and agnostcism. One is a literal state of being, not specific to religion. The other is an ideology toward “deities” based around being agnostic in the topic.

It’s just how -ic and -ism be. Most people that say they are agnostic do not follow agnosticism, even if they may share some of its very widely ranged ideas and concepts.

Richard Dawkins referred to himself as a nontheist as a better term then atheist in one of his books. He said there is no such thing as an agnostic, either you believe or you don’t believe. If undeniable proof of the existence of a god comes along and you refuse to believe then you are just a fool.

Eh, the converse isn’t true. I can be on the fence on whether deities exist. That’s different from being convinced that they don’t.

No. You’re just at different levels of not believing. “While I know Jesus existed I’m just not convinced he was the son of a god” and “There is no way any god exists” will both get you to Hell according to the Bible, or beheaded for heresy depending where and when you are.