Your above position is self-refuting. Mankind’s problem has not been with rationalist philosophies, but rather with irrationalist philosophies, such as yours. Some form of reason must be used in order for a person to convert in belief from one religion to another; or from any belief to another belief, for that matter. It can either be veridical reason, or false reason–but some process of reasoning must be involved.
The field of physics does involve mathematical proofs of physical theories, i.e., physical theorems, such as the Penrose-Hawking-Geroch Singularity Theorems which proved that the Big Bang initial singularity necessarily exists per General Relativity and given the amount of matter observed in the universe. Likewise, the Omega Point/Feynman-DeWitt-Weinberg quantum gravity theory is a mathematical theorem if General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are correct. General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics have been confirmed by every experiment to date, and so the only way to avoid the Omega Point quantum gravity theorem is to reject empirical science. As Prof. Stephen Hawking wrote, “one cannot really argue with a mathematical theorem.” (From p. 67 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)
Further, due to Liouville’s Theorem in complex analysis, it doesn’t matter what form of physics one resorts to, as any physically-realistic cosmology (e.g., one capable of incorporating Quantum Mechanics, since the complex number field is intrinsic to the mathematical formulations of Quantum Mechanics) must begin at an initial singularity and end at a final singularity. (As Barrow and Tipler wrote, “Initial and final cosmological curvature singularities are required to avoid a universal action singularity.” See John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, “Action principles in nature”, Nature, Vol. 331, No. 6151 [Jan. 7, 1988], pp. 31-34; see also Frank J. Tipler, “The Structure of the Classical Cosmological Singularity”, in Origin and Early History of the Universe: Proceedings of the 26th Liège International Astrophyscial Colloquium, July 1-4, 1986 [Cointe-Ougree, Belgium: Universite de Liege, Institut d’Astrophysique, 1987], pp. 339-359; “Discussion”, pp. 360-361.)
This begs the question of what “faith” means in the Christian sense. The word used in the New Testament for faith is pistis (πίστις), which means persuasion, as in persuaded by the evidence. It further carries the meaning of a ground of belief, a guarantee, an assurance. Faith in the Christian sense is trust in the truth, even when things seem hopeless. It does not mean a lack of rationality in coming to belief in Jesus Christ.
For those commonly called Gnostics, such an appellation is a misnomer, since such falsely-called “Gnostics” maintain that the physical world is an evil deception by the Demiurge, and hence that there is no point in attempting to gain systematic knowledge of the physical world. By giving up on attempting to better-know the Mind of God via a study of His creation, modern so-called “Christians” are “Gnostics” in this misnomered sense of the word.
That is what the leading physicists who developed said physics, such as Profs. Albert Einstein, Steven Weinberg, Stephen Hawking, etc., stated was the reason for the rejection by the physics community of the Big Bang cosmology: they stated that it was rejected because it logically implies that God exists. For historical details on this rejection of physical law by physicists when conflicts with their distaste for religion, see Sec. 5: “The Big Bang”, pp. 28-33 of my “Physics of God” article cited above.
That is what the leading physicists who developed said physics, such as Profs. Albert Einstein, Steven Weinberg, Stephen Hawking, etc., stated was the reason for the rejection by the physics community of the Big Bang cosmology: they stated that it was rejected because it logically implies that God exists. For historical details on this rejection of physical law by physicists when conflicts with their distaste for religion, see Sec. 5: “The Big Bang”, pp. 28-33 of my “Physics of God” article cited above.
And again, your knowledge on the history of the Big Bang cosmology is quite lacking. In his famous book A Brief History of Time, Hawking wrote that
“”
Many people do not like the idea that time has a beginning, probably because it smacks of divine intervention. (The Catholic Church, on the other hand, seized on the big bang model and in 1951 officially pronounced it to be in accordance with the Bible.) There were therefore a number of attempts to avoid the conclusion that there had been a big bang. The proposal that gained widest support was called the steady state theory. …
“”
(From p. 62 of Stephen Hawking, The Illustrated A Brief History of Time [New York, NY: Bantam Books, 1996; 1st ed., 1988].)
I cite their statements. I use the Scholarly Method in my above-cited “Physics of God” article.
My above-cited “Physics of God” article also addresses the societal implications of the Omega Point cosmology.
The cosmological singularity is not in either time or space, but rather is the boundary of spacetime.
Due to Liouville’s Theorem in complex analysis, it doesn’t matter what form of physics one resorts to, as any physically-realistic cosmology (e.g., one capable of incorporating Quantum Mechanics, since the complex number field is intrinsic to the mathematical formulations of Quantum Mechanics) must begin at an initial singularity and end at a final singularity. (As Barrow and Tipler wrote, “Initial and final cosmological curvature singularities are required to avoid a universal action singularity.” See John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler, “Action principles in nature”, Nature, Vol. 331, No. 6151 [Jan. 7, 1988], pp. 31-34; see also Frank J. Tipler, “The Structure of the Classical Cosmological Singularity”, in Origin and Early History of the Universe: Proceedings of the 26th Liège International Astrophyscial Colloquium, July 1-4, 1986 [Cointe-Ougree, Belgium: Universite de Liege, Institut d’Astrophysique, 1987], pp. 339-359; “Discussion”, pp. 360-361.)
The word “philosophy” simply means the love of wisdom. To quote physicist and mathematician Prof. Frank J. Tipler on this matter: “The history of science is typically about turning insoluble problems of metaphysics into problems of physics and solving them. Like one of Kant’s problems: Has the universe existed forever, or only a finite time? Kant thought this was fundamentally insoluble too, and had a purported proof of this. But in this century, we’ve turned this supposedly insoluble metaphysical problem into one of physics and solved it, to find the universe is 10 to 20 billion years old.” (From Anthony Liversidge, interview of Frank Tipler, “A Physicist Proposes a Theory of Eternal Life that Yields God”, Omni, Vol. 17, No. 1 [Oct. 1994], pp. 89 ff. [8 pp.].)