We don't assume that there are consistent principles that lead to reliable results at all, rather we theorise that there might be and then test to see if this supposition can be demonstrated practically. So far this has turned out pretty well for us, to put it mildly. We don't need to base that on faith, because as I'm sure you are aware so far it has turned out to be consistently true in practice. That's what testability is all about, the elimination of the need for faith.

If things that at first seem static turn out to change in the universe under changing conditions, that simply isn't a problem for science. Just look at the theory of relativity which superseded Newton's 'static' laws of motion and gravitation.

As for laws of nature originating with religion, the concept was first explicitly articulated in Europe in pagan Rome, but not in any religious context. It certainly didn't come from Christianity with it's volatile, opinionated and highly active and interventionist deity.