Isn't using technology built by atheists wrong for religious people

I wondered, many advancements in science and technology have come from scientists who were atheists. Not all, but a lot of them sure did. My question is, isn't it wrong for religious people to utilize their inventions?

Because, I was wondering if a modern technology could solve the problem of hunger, by directly harnessing energy instead of by food, thereby leading to world peace (I'm aware that by our current theories, the useful energy in the universe is finite, but let's leave that aside). Now, I figured out an objection to this would come from some religions, by stating that this advancement in technology has led them to being able to live in the world indefinitely, instead of reaching heaven like their religion describes. They would say this is a result of not following the word of god, because of which we are not entitled to heaven. (To not not eat food and starving to death would be the sin of suicide).

Of course, I'm keeping this aside from the fact that the world created in this manner could effectively be heaven itself, because some people could still think heaven is something better, because that's the nature of addictions, to seek a higher high.

So, if that is the case, shouldn't they have had not used any form of technology invented by heretics so they'd end up dependent on them? Because right now, people of faith lavishly use technology, while much of them were built by non-faithful engineers (this is true both according to common intuition, but also as observed by surveys). Isn't that immoral, like if it is a good thing, like using the inventions of the hard works of the inventors while calling them heretics, and if it is bad thing, choosing to not have faith?

One counter argument to this could be that the inventions themselves were not bad, but the lack of faith is. That invention could've been done later by a believer. But I have to disagree with this one, because a lot of progress was made by criticizing the beliefs of the time. This is because religions are conservative in general (the ones which aren't don't have this problem at all). This is by nature, because there are a set of rules, beyond which the religion can't protect the believer from divine judgement aside from by repentance. Being conservative means that these set of rules should never be questioned, as it breaks the religion and makes the lives of the believers miserable (for example, the free existence of LGBTQIA+ people, who are dehumanized by religions).

Another argument would be that inventing technology was hard, and while the unfaithful people worked hard to build it, the faithful ones got to enjoy their life, while still being able to experience the fruits of their labour in their worldly life afterwards, while also being able to go to heaven. Now, that's called being nasty. I don't think anyone enjoyed their life with lack of technology, aside from the problems caused by capitalism. That's the whole appeal of technology, medical or computing. Also, then it wouldn't be called a struggle with god to do what's right. It is totally unreasonable for god leave the only chance for improving worldly life as 'through the hard work of heretics'. It is more reasonable that the only chance for improving worldly life was through hard work, and not by 'religious faith', which could only give a temporary relief.

In any case, I can assure you that, I don't consider my work as hard work. It is just something I enjoy. Life does become hard, because people don't mind you much when you don't have the time to interact with them, even though you value them. But that's beyond my control, and I wouldn't be able to do what I'm happy about if I tried to keep their attention. In either case, I had to lose one of them, and suffering is something that's part of life. Even if you did your best, people may ignore you for other reasons, but technology is always just the same. For this reason, I decided to pay more attention to my other interest than with friendships.

Religious views on technology

• Hinduism: Doesn't really care. It cares about ending the cycle of birth and rebirth.
• Buddhism: The first principle requires not wishing for anything in life. Hence, technology is kind of useless.
• Taoism: Doesn't like interfering with nature. But as Alan Watts said, perhaps, technology is not bad in the hands of the people who know they are connected to the world around them.
• Judaism: Mixed. After the original sin, we are supposed to till the earth with soil and sweat. God helped Noah build the Ark, and allowed the use of tools, and even gave him the instructions, but shunned the Tower of Babel.
• Christianity: Still mixed. Some churches had sacred arts, and distanced themselves from secular crafts, while some embraced modern technology.
• Islam: Creating larger structures for meetings was necessary, but the depiction of the godhead or any living being is forbidden in arts and crafts.