Of course there's no "worship" or even "belief" in science, strictly defined.
Instead, the scientific question might be put this way: can we find a natural explanation for how God created life on Earth?
As of today, the answer is a strong: maybe.
“Instead, the scientific question might be put this way: can we find a natural explanation for how God created life on Earth?”
I recall reading where lots of the early scientists were Christians, and viewed their work in science as being possible because they were given reason by an intelligent Creator. I found the following excerpt, which comes after a discussion about how Newton forbade the use verses in the Bible to cross over into the realm of science. Not that he “hated” the Bible - just thought that it should not influence the science. (Newton studied Theology his entire life)
Excerpt:
“Yet for Newton this distinction was not a divorce, much less a conflict. Although the books of God’s Word and his Works were not to provide the content of each other’s teachings, they were bound together.
Newton did not consider one to be sacred and the other secular, nor did Copernicus, Kepler, Galileo, or Pascal—all practicing Christians. Only later Enlightenment philosophy produced a model of “warfare” between science and theology.
Newton’s theology profoundly influenced his scientific method, which rejected pure speculation in favor of observations and experiments. His God was not merely a philosopher’s impersonal First Cause; he was the God in the Bible who freely creates and rules the world, who speaks and acts in history.
The biblical doctrine of creation undergirded Newton’s science. Newton believed in a God of “actions [in nature and history], creating, preserving, and governing … all things according to his good will and pleasure.”
When the believe becomes knowledge; is it still known as 'science'?