The fallacy here is the hasty assumption that all kinds of “faith” are the same, that if scientists aren’t omniscient and their theories are incomplete, scientists must have no viable criticism of religious faith since science too is “faith based.” On the contrary, scientific “faith” is pragmatic and humanistic, the confidence being in our powers of reason that test and build on tentative assumptions (hypotheses) instead of treating them as dogmas.

Arguably, there is indeed a theological aspect of string theory creeping into theoretical physics, but that’s an exception that proves the rule. Science and theistic religions differ sharply in how they handle tribalism and epistemic matters.