Not true, actually.
What is the classical meaning of knowledge if not justified true belief? Doesn't Plato suggest that knowledge is akin to justified true belief in his Theaetetus dialogue?
The religious tend to be at odds with science over evolution.
Shouldn't they be? Though Scientific American et al. hope for our trust, I doubt very much that random mutation and natural selection are sufficient to completely explain the development of life from the simplest self-replicator to modern life. I am even more skeptical of the notion that the Archean earth produced so much as a nucleoside, never mind a self-replicator, in some purely natural and step-wise fashion.
Carrots and movie theater popcorn oil both provide Vitamin A. At least here Vitamin A is the same in both examples.
I should say instead that the philosophy of religion/theology and science each provide knowledge.