"If I have any basic belief, it is the belief that God is logical and his actions are consistent with reason. The rest of the universe is, so why would its creator not be."
So, yeah, difficult proposition there. As I mentioned earlier, there are a whole lot of assumptions in what you consider ‘God’. Also to be considered is the er, considerable difficulty with this notion of rationality and logic. As I see it, these are human terms and should be looked at as constructs that help us to communicate and understand our world (read: heuristic), presumably with the goal of helping us make better life decisions. This may be why quantum mechanics and concepts like ‘time’ and its ’beginning’ and ‘end’ make no sense to us: They don’t have any survival value so we weren’t made with a view to understanding them. To the extent we do is an artifact of our language, but it obviously breaks down at some point.
This is an important point to consider when we make statements like “the universe is logical or rational”. How do we know this? Einstein says God does not play dice, but failed miserably to prove this and recanted it as one of his greatest errors*. He was reacting to Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle which, in essence, said that we can only ‘know’ (or better, maybe predict?) ‘things’ to a certain degree. After that, we cannot know what exists and what doesn’t. Thus we are left scratching our heads at absurdities such as infinities: splitting things forever and time’s beginning and so forth.
More to the point you made, to Einstein this meant the universe was, underneath, chaotic, random, at root, unknowable. What does that imply for us concerning our ability to apprehend ‘real’ things? Well, it might mean that the universe really is chaotic and random and that our brains/minds act as organizer. A structure for taking all of that data and organizing it from chaos into meaningful data.
So, we could go two routes from this. One is that we could say aha! Since we are a part of the universe, we could say that though the universe be chaos, it does have rational forces in it (i.e. us - minds?, animals). Maybe
Or we could say that what we perceive is still chaos. It is still jumbled data and that the only reason it appears rational to us if for survival value. But at its core, it means nothing without us. Like a CD without a CD player. Evolution has done its best to filter and through trial and error get a good image for the eyes that makes sense for survival, but that data is, at core, still jumbled and only subject to meaning viz a viz eyes or whatever else was incepted to marshal that data into what is to us, meaning.
So, what we understand may be complete and utter nonsense to another being and vice versa. If this is true, we may as well exist on different planes. Again, I don’t know if it is true. Maybe what we understand really reflects to some degree, as imperfect as it is, something of reality. This is the logical positivist view; and we are certainly more apt to think in this vein than not. Yet, who can be sure?
*this wasn’t meant to mean Einstein believed in God or anything, it was used as metaphor – doesn’t say he didn’t believe either – but he certainly didn’t believe in the Judeo-Christian God