The short answer is yes.
To say that you reject not just particular individual gods (like Zeus, Vishnu, or Yahweh), but all gods (or the concept of God), necessarily entails that you must also believe that matter, energy, the laws of nature, and time are either eternal or self created from nothing. You must further believe that matter precedes mind (telos ) at the “beginning.” You must also believe that the universe is one (not two), and is thus, in some sense, a closed system. These are just some of the things atheists necessarily believe when they reject the concept of God altogether. It is a position for which empirical evidence cannot lend direct or final warrant to the atheist for believing.
This is why it is not fair of atheists to say that theism is inherently opposed to science, while atheism is its natural ally. It is true that empiricism and atheism, via their mutual commitments to philosophical naturalism, are kin to one another, and emerged in full force out of a specific historical context (The Enlightenment). Empiricism, afterall, cannot function at all if it allows for supernatural explanations of data. But unfortunately, empiricism cannot, in any final sense, adjudicate between theism and atheism, for empiricism cannot reach, with data, to the ultimate question—the ontological mystery—that divides theists from atheists:
Why is there something when there might have been nothing?
There are only three answers to this question: matter is eternal; matter is self-created from nothing; matter was created by some sort of mind (or telos ). All three answers invite question begging and cannot be warranted by empirical moves.