- ssu
I think there is somewhat of a hang-up on when the numbers come into existence. Pi is not the best example to try to bring up though as even if we contend that Pi is infinite, it is only infinite in one direction. The beginning of Pi is clear and defined, meaning 3. There are no numbers to the left of Pi. For the lack of a better or more established term at the moment it can be thought of to have 'forward infinity' meaning extending into the future.

- ssu
Pi is a number, but doesn't come into existence until calculated. It is the product of an equation. Absent the equation or at least prior to the existence of the equation it is just set of numbers without meaning. And even if it could be argued that Pi is infinite, you still have to begin it with 3. So while you could debate its existence with or without the equation, you still have to begin by writing 3, and even the equation goes through a dividing process that results in the first divide being 3. In the end it is a representation of infinity, but has a very clear beginning.

- Terrapin Station
The reference to 'nothing' meant that nothing came before the Big Bang was one of the possible choices, making the Big Bang the thing that is infinite. Whatever you arrive at, if nothing came before it, that thing is infinite. Even if we try to characterize what came before the Big Bang as 'nothing' that nothing is something, a void of white or darkness or just 'nothing' but that inself is a characteristic making it infinite, because it had to be. Essentially, everything comes from something, except that which was there at the beginning.

- fishfry
Using the integers as a example though, they cannot be shown as infinite, only represented to be infinite. Meaning to show their infinity you must first write one down on the page. Think of it as a road that goes on toward infinity to the left and right. In walking up to the road you can see the represention of its infinity but the road had to be built before it became infinite. The integers are the same as the road.

You can't argue verses from the Bible though solely as they are not the entirety of Christian texts. You have to bring in all of the Apocryphal texts, or at least the ones that have been shown to have as much historical validity as the core Biblical texts. Even then you arrive at the conclusion that a 'true' Christian cannot operate based upon random things stated in the texts as most of the text was not attributed to statements made by Jesus. From a technical standpoint then, 'true' Christianity is derived from the words of Christ, of which there are very few in the Bible, and a few more in some of the Apocryphal texts. Thus, to be treat an animal as a 'true' follower of Christ you would have limit any concepts of the treatment of animals to the few words of Christ that are attributed to Christ. Even then you are left with the fact that Christ is not known to have written anything down himself, therefore any statements attributed to him are second hand and speculative. In short, the closest way to know how to treat animals according to Christianity is to reference the words of Jesus in any text that contains them, however as it cannot be proven which are actually the words of Christ, there is no actual way to know how a Christian should treat animals.

My advice, adhear to the 'Do unto others' teaching. If you wouldn't want to be treated that way, probably shouldn't treat an animal that way either.

Black holes are a consequence of Relativity. Various aspects of Relativity are testable and there are lots of studies to support much of what Relativity postulates, at least from a mathematical perspective. The problem with black holes is there aren't exactly many nearby and our own effortst to create one have thus far not produced a result so much of the study in this area remains theoretical and the remainder is largely confined to what is observable through telescopes. And within the theories there is debate regarding what goes on in and around them. So, at present, much of what is postulated about black holes is not testable.