Science, being conducted reasonably and responsibly, does not claim to know the answer to "Why", but it is good in examining the question of "How".
Religion does not care for either examing the question of "Why" or "How", it just raises claims and afterwards present them as facts, unchecked, and declares it a virtue to just blindly believe.
And in my opinion, quites ome of those smart minds science has seen, and quite some of those atheists, are anti-theistic, but not anti-religion. Atheism does not mean to be anti-spiritual. There are religions that are coming along without theistic concepts.
Christian mystics mentioned what they called the divine spark in creation, and i everything that exists, and you can see that much of what the tried to point at, often by saying what "it" is
not, indicates they thought that God is not to be seen as a separate entitiy and creator of what exoists, but to be expressed in all that exists and thus every single part of creation
IS God, or the divine. Buddhists would call it the Buddha-essence in all and everything. But originally, by Buddha'S teachings, Buddhism is a non-theistic or atheistic religion.
For theistic fundamentalists, claiming the above of course is nothing but heresy and blasphemy. They want their own little deity-in-the-pocket to make deals with when they feel sad, that is comfortable and feeds the illusion of being safe. To tell them that you and me and themj and all and everything actually is God, is often a reason for them to attack. "Do you now take it upon you to declare yourself a God?"
Not really. Not "
a god", but "
the God"
, and not just me, but everything that I perceive and believe to be "existing".
What were those last words at the ending of this great movie, "A thin red line"? -
Oh my soul, look out through my eyes, look at all those things you've made, all things shining."
The gardener is just a dream the garden dreams.