seems like good reasoning to me.
except this same observable universe is considered a legitimate basis from which to reason other ideas. see the previous posts for a more complete explanation
Observation and reason work hand in hand. It’s important to understand that they’re not mutually exclusive. One can come to realize objective truths through observation alone or through reason alone. However, there are some truths that require a more Kantian approach.
I will speak to specific quotes of yours (and others) from the thread:
the fact that a theory has been reasoned by respectable scientists from the evidence of the observable universe leads me to believe that there is no logical reason as to why one should start this chain of events with the ‘big bang’
and
what is the logical reason that this event should be the beginning of a chain of events?
Actually, there is a logical reason as to why we hypothesize that the universe started out with a “big bang” (or, at the very least, had a definite starting point). The universe is expanding. We can measure stellar objects (stars, moons, planets, etc) and notice that they are all spreading apart, moving in their own directions. Understanding the laws of physics, specifically regarding the laws of movement, we can conclude that there must be a prime moving (derived from the early-physics term “Prime Mover”) force that had to have set these objects in motion.
Additionally, we can use graphing techniques, using information we gather from mathematical equations (remember that math is logic), observation of light emission, stellar parallax, stellar differentiation, and universal expansion, we have determined that the universe is in the “shape” of an
oval.
I will explain the rest of this point and tie it in with another (they’re very similar), because you have stated this:
i subscribe to the idea that the universe is a creation as do billions upon billions of other people
And the Big Bang Theory does not deny this idea. In fact, the theory was formulated by a monk in Europe (really vague, I know, but I’d rather not give specifics if I’m not sure about them). We know from my aforementioned explanation that the universe had to have a starting point. Additionally, we know that the universe has an age, which we have determined to be around 13.5 billion years, at the very least. (Note that this age was determined using the farthest observable object in the universe, located in what is known as the Hubble Deep Field.)
We understand the chemical processes (among other things) that must occur for a stellar object to be born. Using this chemistry, we can determine with relatively acceptable probability when these objects came into existence. For example, we have determined that earth is approximately 4.5 billion years old. We’ve found this using calculations and analysis of the earth’s properties in relation with other stellar objects.
The only tool necessary is the basic ability to listen to natural law.
I’ve already replied to this statement in this and my other post, but I felt it necessary to reiterate: we have three primary tools at our disposal.
The only “question” that needs to be considered in this matter is the question of whether one believes that “infinities” are real, or if they’re not real.
Not necessarily. While I understand the point you’re trying to make, it’s not the only question that needs to be asked or answered. The universe isn’t infinite, it’s rather finite.
To conclude that infinities are real is to believe in anything but God and His creation as being real. To conclude that infinities are unreal is to believe in God and His creation as being real.
To a certain extent, you are right, but only in terms of the physical realm.
Find me an instance of a real infinity?
God.
As a point of clairification: is your question more along the lines of “knowing that God exist,” or more along the lines of Church teaching, say, that Abortion is an “intrisic evil?”
and
more like the first i guess
A lot of evidence is out there that points to the existence of God. However, there will never be proof, simply on the grounds that all would be subject to Him, rendering free will irrelevant and thusly negating the purpose of mankind’s existence.
Knowing that God exists is a personal experience. At some point, faith ends and knowledge begins. I like to use an example of my own personal realization. For a long time, I believed in God. But, there came a time where I personally realized that He existed. I wasn’t praying to anything, to nothing. My priestly calling wasn’t coming out of nowhere. My own mind wasn’t nagging me about it. This love I felt wasn’t some imaginary emotion coming from a creation of my own sensibilities. No, there came a point where I just
knew that God existed. That’s the beauty of having a personal relationship with Him, that’s the purpose.
You can only explain it so much. You can only provide so much evidence. At some point, the person has to experience this objective truth subjectively, through an intimate, personal experience that will leave the person with no doubts as to God’s existence.
