Perhaps. I’d suppose there needs be some logic involved. I can’t accept a religious belief that defies logic, and I don’t believe that God made us with logical minds, just to provide illogical revelations. So, I suppose your term only applies if it’s “entirely” based on religious belief. The difference for me is that the teachers of my religion are trained in philosophy, and the ones with degrees in science are not.
My idea is that real science cannot be opposed to true faith, because truth is always true. There are only mistakes and mistaken ideas. If the religion is true, the science must agree with it, as well as the reverse.-Glenn
Such a statement has no meaning in science, which seeks the best explanation consistent with the evidence.
Science can rule out explanations that are not consistent with available evidence, but it will always be revising its theories and conjectures to fit new evidence.
This does not men science cannot be confident about its assertions; it just means that theories are continually being refined. As a general rule obsolete laws and theories remain true for the subset conditions known at the time they were formulated.