Replies

"We know the stars are very far away and took a very long time for that light to reach us."

Um, we don't *know* that light took a 'very long time' to reach us.

We calculate that it did based on an *assumption* that the speed of light is unchanged over time. In some cases, we add that *assumption* to another *assumption* that redshift equals distance for even older age calculations.

This quite a different thing than 'knowing'.

But the light from those stars we capture and study is direct evidence. Observable, repeatable, quantifiable and thus theory's can be extrapolated and put forth to the world community to apply scientific process and put those theory's to the test.

The evidence alone separates it from faith.
And in my opinion the scientific process is the best tool humanity has in "knowing" and explaining about our world and everything around us and it. yes there are still mysteries. Faith and science both seek similar goals at times, to solve those mysteries.
But you must have faith to believe in any of earths thousands of current religions.

Theology and philosophy is a different study then science.
And rightly so. If someone finds faith through science good for them. If someone finds no evidence of the supernatural in all our scientific endeavors good for them too. It is a personal choice in the end. Both sides would serve them well to be more respective of the other, and most certinaly do I believe. I think it is a small number from both sides the stir the pot.