In my mind there appears to be a stark contrast between religious and nonreligious reasoning with regard to the question of our origins. A religious mindset puts far more weight upon narratives that are not derived from objectivity. They are admittedly said to be derived from various authority figures, be it God or one of his prophets.
Anyone can inflate their God to be the ultimate answer to our existence, this is relatively easy and quite trivial as far as explanatory power is concerned. Rather, what really gives an argument traction and scope is an invested commitment to discover the universe both scientifically and mathematically.
We ought to favor careful, methodical inquiry into the deepest questions about our universe any day of the week! Without such objectivity and discipline we are then favoring a human imagination that has no true compass or reference point from which to build an argument. In addition to that, we would be giving past authoritative statements far more weight than they deserve precisely because they were often wrong about reality and contradictory in their assertions.
It is fine to be biased for the right reasons, wouldn’t you agree?