"Regardless of culture people attribute agency to the supernatural. This is despite the fact that nothing supernatural (perhaps by definition) can be empirically observed,".

I don't think science should make theological claims. People attribute agency, period. What happens after is that we observe that much of that is amenable to observation.

For example the non-existence of global floods (19th century). The inefficacy of intercessory prayer (2006). The non-existence of a single human breeder pair (2011). That the universe to 10^22:1 or in other words 100 % must be a result of a spontaneous process (as per curvature measure of initial energy; 2012). That the LHC completion of the Standard Model means any ideas of souls/afterlife/rebirth would need 10^3 times the energy they are allowed from QED precision measurements (2013).

The same goes for the description of abrahamistic religions in point 1-3, I don't think science should be limited to the observation of those. Religions started AFAIK out as attributing agency spurred by our ability to see patterns and imagine agency. Often looking for human analogs.

Granted, some religions grappled with explanation, some with death, some with destiny. But I don't think we can model religion on those specifically.

As for eternity, I think Sean Carroll's latest summer school in cosmology was enlightening. The absence of eternity, which LHC may imply (not quite 3 sigma for a quasi-stable vacuum), may be necessary to get rid of Boltzmann Brains. Eg the problem isn't that quantum mechanics isn't spontaneously spawning things, like universes from the quantum void, the problem is that it does so too eagerly, like BB fluctuations out of a thermal vacuum. Meaning, magic is not even on the horizon today, the real problem is that nature is too "creative".