Science and Religion? Opposites!
Rationally, a Creator is looking like a more reasonable and logical choice every day. Advances in science continue to stack the odds against our accidental and undirected origin. Could life have started by chance? Knowing what we know now, it would appear not (see the links to synthetic organic chemist James Tour, below). Can you continue to believe this? Absolutely, but realize that you are going against current evidence to do so.

Why is this important? Your decisions will have consequences... 
consequences?happy with my god and scienceyoutube: synthetic organic chemist james tourDeep Dive: synthetic organic chemist james tour

Why would the God that created the universe (and made it uniquely discoverable), expect us to check our intellect at the door in order to follow Him? Why would He have given us the curiosity to try and understand our world if doing so would of necessity lead us away from Him?

There has never been a better time to be a person of faith. Looking at true scientific advances we have made in all fields objectively, the evidence against undirected accidental creation just keeps mounting up.

The myth of 'junk DNA' has now been shattered. This phenomenal increase in the complexity of the effective genome now becomes an even more serious hurdle for evolutionary theory. Information is distinct from matter and has never been observed to arise from it. Where did all this information originate?

Despite well over a hundred years of research hoping to prove otherwise, the fossil record continues to support a creation model more consistently than an evolutionary one. Fossils are still shown to appear suddenly in the record, without transitional forms... and they exhibit stasis. Science has clear cut the evolutionary trees and replaced them with an evolutionary thicket.

New research has led scientists to theorize that we are living in a digital simulation. This could potentially answer many questions about the nature of our reality. (If our universe is rendered for us in what we know as real time, it might explain the Observer Effect...) If true, this would raise a very important question. Who is running this simulation? Scientists hypothesize a future version of us, or aliens, but would God be a more logical answer?
If this is a simulation, could true reality actually be what has been previously explained to us as heaven? Having been immersed in hyper-realistic video game worlds, we can now easily intuit this, but how would you explain it to someone a hundred (let alone a thousand), years ago? (If you were writing a book to make sense of today's technology for people from a distant past, you wouldn't start with the technical details. You would draw on contemporaneous similes and parallel examples to ensure that the information was understandable for everyone.) What if entering the 'afterlife' is really just departing this Matrix? If so, and if God, then what would be the purpose of the simulation? Perhaps to have the opportunity to make a binding choice to participate in reality, because once we are there, we are there forever?

Advances in epigenetic research point towards each genome already having all the necessary survival information on board, with genes being switched on or off depending on environmental forces. This has better explanatory power regarding fast adaptations to external circumstances than random mutation and natural selection alone. (For example: Let's say we lived in a house in a normally cool climate. During an unusually hot day, the air conditioner kicks in. Would it make more sense to infer that the building somehow acquired an air conditioner, or that a built in one was thermostatically activated?)

These are just a few small examples. Do the research for yourself. If you haven't been keeping up, prepare to be amazed. Remember to keep your search scientific, in the purest sense of the word. Theories that stray into the 'super'natural (invoking things we do not observe to explain things we do), are by their very definition not facts. Neither does scientific consensus on a theory make it true. Many theories have come and gone in the history of science. Some of them were held, by consensus, for a long time before they succumbed to the inconvenience of reality.

The issue with blind belief in consensus science or popular religion is that there are consequences.

youtube: inner life of a cellconsequences?happy with my god and science Patreon