The threshold of belief

As we know, science has its own conditions for determining and understanding the phenomena of the world. The conditions include pure objectivity and the possibility of repeated observation and verification of the claim (by other scientists). As a believer in God, you do not necessarily accept these conditions as *accurate* conditions for determining what is true and what is not (i.e. what should be believed) because science does not accept God as a scientific theory and does not recognize him. You believe in God, from what I understand, due to philosophical and not scientific arguments. I wanted to ask where in your opinion the line is drawn between what should be believed in and what should be rejected, in relation to the fact that science does not accept God? Unlike evolution, the Big Bang, the existence of atoms and gravity, whose truth is a fact for all intents and purposes, science does not accept God as a supersubject (or however science is defined) whose goal is to discover more about the world in an objective way.
So why doesn't science accept God if it's such a clear necessity that you think disbelief in God is a heresy in rationality?