In order for your response to be philosophical, shouldn't you be mediating between many different classics works and coming to an independent judgement of your own? And what does the "religious atheist" mean by "sacred"? If he or she just means "reverent", then wouldn't that be a "reverent atheist"? If he or she means "something beyond mere human reverence", then wouldn't he or she be leaving the spirit of atheism behind and stepping into claims about the transcendent? Atheism isn't just the denial of God, it has historically acquired the added feature of 'the denial of God and other stuff like God'. If someone is an atheist conspiracy theorist, we chuckle about them not being very consistent ('look, you're trying to clean up the human mess of contingency with an all-explaining thing that is just out of reach!'). This notion of the religious atheist (who is also being a good atheist!) seems confusing.