Two totally different concepts of genes. Both stated by evolutionary biologists.

The modern concept of the gene divides evolution believers into two camps

Old concept: 

"They did not die out, for they are past masters of the survival arts. But do not look for them floating loose in the sea; they gave up that cavalier freedom long ago. Now they swarm in huge colonies, safe inside gigantic lumbering robots, sealed off from the outside world, communicating with it by tortuous indirect routes, manipulating it by remote control.

They are in you and in me; they created us, body and mind; and their preservation is the ultimate rationale for our existence. They have come a long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name of genes, and we are their survival machines.”  

Richard Dawkins, The Selfish Gene (1976, 2006)

Modern concept: 

"I think that as a gene-centric view of evolution, the modern synthesis has got causality in biology wrong. Genes, after all, if they’re defined as DNA sequences, are purely passive. DNA on its own does absolutely nothing until activated by the rest of the system through transcription factors, markers of one kind or another, interactions with the proteins. So on its own, DNA is not a cause in an active sense. I think it is better described as a passive data base which is used by the organism to enable it to make the proteins that it requires." 

Denis Noble, 2014

 
My comment: Genes, after all, if they’re defined as DNA sequences, are purely passive. What kind of mechanisms and factors are needed in order to get DNA being activated in the cell?

The answer: Epigenetic mechanisms and factors. Gene centric theory of evolution has failed.

Atheists want to maintain the pseudoscientific theory of evolution established by Charles Darwin and touted by Richard Dawkins. That's why they are resisting the progress of science.