I have the opposite experience you described. Contemplating the infinitude of reality draws me toward religion via logic. Through contemplation it seems to follow that there's something important happening with meaning beyond our comprehension.
I take offense with this description. Take Christianity and Islam and you've got half the world's populations. Are those 3.5 billion people all stupid westerners?
“Poets say science takes away from the beauty of the stars - mere globs of gas atoms. I too can see the stars on a desert night, and feel them. But do I see less or more? The vastness of the heavens stretches my imagination - stuck on this carousel my little eye can catch one - million - year - old light. A vast pattern - of which I am a part... What is the pattern, or the meaning, or the why? It does not do harm to the mystery to know a little about it. For far more marvelous is the truth than any artists of the past imagined it. Why do the poets of the present not speak of it? What men are poets who can speak of Jupiter if he were a man, but if he is an immense spinning sphere of methane and ammonia must be silent?”
Or, indeed, any religions.
Buddhism and perhaps other Indian religions have some really large numbers, e.g. http://allergrootste.com/big/book/ch1/ch1_7.html
[1]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindu_cosmology#:~:text=Every%....
That in blessing I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea shore; and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies[1]
Almost every atheist will reject religion, given what religion typically is and which is captured pretty well in the definition above.
Two completely different concepts, one word. So it's a bit confusing. But for someone discussing the second type of religion, saying it's "man-made" is definitely a knockout punch.
I don't think there's anything wrong with religions that acknowledge (and even embrace) the man-made aspect.
TLDR: Importance does not equate to size, just as space does not equate to mass nor mass to value (value being the particular distribution of elements within a mass).
you can generalize that statement very far; religion is one of the key "technologies" which allows communities to scale past 5K people. Think "city".
Thus religion has a very different purpose than physics. It is about psychological health on a community and individual level.
The stories of physics, on the other hand, "eerie ideas such as force field, wavefunction, observable,..." don't really tell you much about how to handle things when your neighbor's barking dog is frustrating you.
(insert snarky comment about engineering a force field to solve the problem)
Even assuming that the bible is the literal word of deity, it is inconsistent to believe that the creation stories of genesis are descriptions of actual physical processes. because that is not why deity put those stories there. because deity was talking using a language which is 1.5-3K years old (let's agree to not argue dates, I'll accept the date you prefer), and words like "world" and "universe" meant something very very different back then than they do today. So if it is deity's literal word, then it must literally mean what it meant in the context of that earlier culture.
BTW: The numbers involved in each description are also telling. Those used by religions are often small and comfortable for a human mind, e.g. ten commandments, seven days of creation. Even the supposed large numbers such as 144,000 never come close to what you need to describe nature such as the number of stars in our galaxy (around 10^11) or the number of atoms in a human body (order of 10^27). See physics constants for even better examples. Also, religions often describe reality using numbers that look suspiciously memorable in decimal notation. OTOH, nature never gives us round decimal-friendly numbers for constants. I think this also makes religion feel manmade and science authentic.