Type in a keyword to find where it appears in The Bible.
There is no such thing as evidence-based faith. The author of this video appears to misunderstand this by making the claim that "science takes faith as a starting point". Faith in things, dreams, desires, achievements, ideas, and so on... is present in every person. Everyone has natural curiosity about things. In this sense, the author is right. But this is quite different from having faith in god. In fact, this is direct opposite once you recognize the differences at the root of each position.
First, there are different types of scientists. There is a faithful science and there is just brute-force intellectual logic-based science that seeks absolute evidence. Even in scientific community, scientists are divided by their faith or its lack. Doubly so. They are divided by faith in things. And by faith in god. So there are 4 divisions. The entire thing is too complex to argue about with any amount of self-righteousness. These permutations and inherent misunderstandings create complex disagreements that end up in dead ends.
The starting point of one particular kind of science is the desire to know how the universe works. But not only that, it starts with the desire of knowing how the entire universe works. There is quite a difference. The latter is accompanied by the motive to:
If you are a Christian, you will see the parallels, that the 3 points above are exactly the "job" of god, to care about his creation, in these exact ways. Because through faith you realize that he has the absolute knowledge, and so he is able to provide exactly what he believes each person needs. But this idea exists on a completely different wavelength, than this scientific approach in particular -- which tries hard to destroy this line, because it is primarily atheistic.
Is this wavelength the spiritual wavelength? Well, the problem is that even spirituality is about progress or decency of self. But religion is about decency of god. That’s really the question. Not who is right or wrong about how something works in the depths of the universe. In fact, religion is not about just decency of god but his ultimate goodness. It is sometimes said, god is love. But not often.
In today’s culture, god is a villain. He is the crazy, controlling guy who causes calamities. If god is good why does he allow bad things to happen? This is a very common argument today. And some scientists seek knowledge out of curiosity. Others, so they can “fix” this. But inevitably if you bring this to its logical conclusion this would make you, the person of a particular invention, the person who does good in the world. Not just any kind of good, but a good that is better than the good of god.
In order to solve a problem or improve upon something, you must first recognize that something is wrong. With some types of science, in particular this "something" is absolute knowledge. But this implies the responsibilities of god. So this will clash with religious (religion when it means worship and admiration of god, not a religious organization or doctrine in this sense) perspective. A person of faith trusts that god provides all these things for him or her.
Science tries to eliminate religion. Religion tries... well it doesn't try to eliminate science. It simply accepts reality of their life as god-given with all its bad and good parts. It doesn't imply that just because something feels bad to you personally, it must be improved. It accepts the humble spirit.
By acknowledging that humanity needs improvement in many areas which "science" can supposedly provide, it takes on a supposedly benevolent and humble position, where it recognizes that there are things that are wrong. And that they can and should be fixed. Ironically the science of psychology tells us a few things about the meaning of this type of behavior.
By acknowledging problems that should be solved, and taking it to the point of "lack of absolute knowledge with desire to improve the world and humankind," in a way science is trying to get rid of "sin", just like some religious organizations or "spirituality" movements. (I am different, I am one step ahead of the "religious" folks, because I am "spiritual".)
If you take teleportation, for example. It can be viewed as an attempt to pretty much "do miracles", make things disappear and appear. To control things in ways that assume power from absolute knowledge. Eg: trying to be god. However, faith is the opposite of all that. It is all about acknowledging that you are not god, that you cannot do all things. That you fall short of what he is like.
Finally the irony is that true faith, when it is truly present in a person (not achieved, or acknowledged to be there from birth "by default" in just about everyone), and in itself, as if by the merit of that same miracle science wishes to obtain, offers a complete solution to this problem benevolently, without pride or aggression, through the shed blood of Jesus Christ. If one had the heart or personal curiosity to learn what it actually means, before writing it off as what religious organizations tell you in speeches that sound maddening and incomprehensible, and at times hypocritical and self-righteous.