Scientists who happen to also be atheists tell us that we must not consider God into the research, for if we do we will kill science. They tell us that by definition, science deals with natural causes and that if we mix in God as a cause or a designer or even as an idea, we have mixed in religion and done away with the foundations of science.
John Lennox, in his book God’s Undertaker: Has Science Buried God? points out that there were many scientists in the history of their fields which were also solid Christians, and it helped their research, and did not hinder it. When Newton published his work on gravity, he did not say “I’ve shown one more reason why we don’t need God.” Rather, just the opposite; he felt that he had shown one more proof of God’s handiwork. Lennox also points out that just because we understand a few things about how the mechanism works, we cannot then conclude that the mechanism was never created by anyone, that it came to be without an ultimate cause.
Lennox also points out the differences in worldview, and how it was theism that made scientific research prosper.
In considering what science is and what it can do, we have scientists who tell us that science only deals with natural things in the world, and in our science we must not consider anything outside of the natural order, since then we are no longer doing science. Actually, this is all well and good, and we have no issues with this. If the scientists wants to define his work as only dealing with natural things, great, have a nice day, those in the Christian camp have no issues with this viewpoint. We do not even have fundamental issues if they try to deal with claims Christians have made about the natural order; this is just the free exchange of ideas. We only have issues when the scientists cross the line they have made and start telling us things about God. For many modern atheist scientists are running around telling us they have started with limiting themselves to exclusively natural things, then concluded things about God, who is outside of the natural world. Men like Dawkins and Harris write books telling us that somehow they have started with observing natural effects and concluded that God does not exist. Not only is this logically absurd, but it violates the rules of the game that they created. They seem to be worried that religion will creep into science, while they are busily hustling science into religion. If they want to keep their science separate, stop making claims about God
In reality, as many have shown, we can view things in the natural world and draw a few, admittedly limited, logical conclusions about what is outside the natural world. We can know, for instance, that the world did not get here by itself, something outside the world caused it. Whatever this cause is, it is powerful and not created. You can find more on this in a great book called Natural Theology by William Lane Craig.
In the end, it is a mistake to view science and faith as in a contest for power, for they are not in a ball game together that has a winner and a loser.