Divine Atheist?

Chapter 16 got me thinking some because I partially disagree with it, or more the translator’s assessment of it.  Maybe I have no right to, since he clearly knows more about the Gita than I do, but I can’t help but disagree with his explanation of what the ultimate form of “demonic” is.  Easwaran explains that the best way to think of the form of demonic attributes is atheism, but when I read Krishna’s descriptions, I did not think that was the best way to describe it.  For one, just because someone’s an atheist does not mean they are indulging in sinful desires or are self-consumed.  Two, it seems to me that what makes Krishna more angry than lack of faith, is pseudo-faith, or when people falsely present themselves as lovers of god.  I can’t speak for other religions, but I know that within Christianity, there is a lot of this false faith happening.  We chastise atheists for living their lives without Christ, saying that even good deeds mean nothing if they are not done for God, but then many of us turn around in hypocrisy and become consumed with pride or generosity that is aimed at an esteemed reputation rather than serving the poor.  It seems to me that the latter would disturb Krishna much more than an atheist who, while not doing it for any god, may still lead a life closer to Krishna’s divine attributes.  Here I have a question though.  Does the atheist still accrue good karma through their actions despite the fact that it is not done with the ultimate goal of serving and being devoted to Krishna?