But you can't just dismiss the science as saying it's Godless. True, science doesn't look to God for an answer. It will try to prove the 2+2=4 every single time without looking for a supernatural explanation for that.
Science is wholly unequipped to test or even postulate supernatural explanations for anything. If it did, there would be no science. Sir Isaac Newton's apple would fall to the ground because God wanted it to. No further investigation is necessary.
God could be behind the Big Bang or not, or He could be behind the origin of life (which is what I favor until I see any evidence to the contrary), or he could be behind the physical rules of the universe that made Darwin's concept the most likely explanation for the origin of species (which I also believe).
You and I see this differently in that we can see the same things, and you believe one side is saying God can't be involved, and I see that He could be involved in every single step.
That's a matter of philosophy and religion, and there is nothing wrong about arguing about that. That's a good thing. We have a chance of making each other smarter by doing that.
We might, I don't know, disagree whether the Creation story in Genesis is literal or alleghorical. But I don't think we disagree that God's hand is all over where we are now. If we're worried about God, He can take care of Himself, and I don't think it's required that everyone believe EXACTLY the same thing about our origins to know Him.
But scientists are human beings with biases, even hatred that poisons science.
IF “science” doesn’t find any purpose to me that’s Godless. It’s not a bad word or evil it just IS simply Godless!
On the otherhand, if a scientist sees something differently than another and sees creation, purpose, intelligent design, that doesn’t mean they see what they see the WRONG way, it simply means they have a wholly different perspective!
The same is true of religion, history etc.
For instance...someone stated 2/3 of scientists are believers...the number isn’t important but they naturally see God in all aspects of their beings. There’s no magical switch believers turn off when they’re in a laboratory, therefore they see God in all that is in all that they do, see feel touch, experience. There’s no way to somehow REMOVE God from science therefore.
We can argue all day and forever about God’s existence, and rather or not all they see and experience and smell and do is simply imagnied, but there’s no way to really know that, as you say to prove one way or the other, so until it can or can not be proved it therefore isn’t “right” or “wrong” or “real” or “unreal” perception.
I’m sure the reverse is true for the reverse situation...no matter how hard a person tries, let’s say he can go to church, yet simply not see any possibility of God! Therefore, there’s no way to say he’s “wrong” if he doesn’t see God!
Current science isn’t some magical vacuum as we perceive it.
Put it this way, would there be “science” if there was no life to be found anywhere, ever?
Science isn’t some pristine and perfect entity with a neutral and natural mind of it’s own, it’s a tool of infallible human beings to assist in them understanding the many facets of perception in the world around them, but certainly not all, and not even close.