A Week to Love - Liam Payne Short Story

Question #2

I woke up early again the next morning, having not slept very well last night. Last night I was plagued with doubts constantly running through my head, telling me that Liam wouldn't buy it, that my arguments weren't strong enough, that we'd never be together. Not very good for sleeping, to say the least. 

I roll over, groaning. I really do have a headache today. This is a lot harder than it should be. I guess it's because I care about Liam so much. I don't know what I'd do without him. But love is not always enough, sometimes other things, circumstances, get in the way. This is one of those times. 

When I pick up Liam's letter for today, I'm silently praying that it won't be too difficult. My head is hurting and I'm not sure how well I'm going to be able to think. I groan as I read through the letter. Well, that was one prayer that wasn't answered affirmatively.

Dear Christina, the letter started off,

What you said made sense, I guess. I've still got to think through what you wrote, it's really weird for me to see that side of it.  Anyway, I've done a lot of thinking tonight. I guess I'm willing to see what you have to say. 

So, you say that Christianity makes the most sense logically. I'm not sure how this can be. For example: Prove to me that God exists. How do you know he does? You have no evidence, do you? It seems to me as though you just want him to exist so you believe in him. That's not really a question, is it, but I guess that's the biggest issue I have right now.

I miss you Chris,

Liam

I exhale slowly before pulling out another piece of paper to respond. It's still really early, I have time before I have to be at work and I think I might be able to get a good start on this one or even finish it before I get there. 

Dear Liam,

Well, to start off with, can I first say that I believe that God is a being that exists apart from us. My belief does not make God real or not real, anymore than someone's belief that he doesn't exist makes him real or not real. See, some people believe that God is a projection of our minds; that we desire him to exist (so we trick ourselves into thinking that he does) but he really doesn't. Let me start out by saying that just because I desire something doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. I desire frappuccinos all the time, and they're everywhere. :) In other words, yes, I desire that there be a God. But desiring him doesn't mean that he's simply a projection of my desire, and it doesn't mean there really isn't one.

I'm going to take you through two different arguments for God's existence. They get super deep, so stay with me. I know you're smart :) 

The first argument is not a complete proof for God. It's rather a comparison of the theistic vs atheistic worldviews.  It's called the Transcendental Argument. It's where you infer something based off of what you observe. For example, if I know something, you can infer I have a mind. It's not like I did research to prove that I have a mind, or have specific evidence that says that I have a mind, but you know this anyway. Once I acknowledge that something is real, that knowledge is possible, a mind is a necessary thing. It's a way of finding out what is true based on what we already know to be true.

Now, atheism says that everything that exists is in the physical, that it can be quantified in some way. Looking at things in the physical, though, excludes many things. It excludes morality – for how can you prove that torturing babies is wrong if everything that exists is physical? You can't say that it's wrong because physically, morality doesn't exist. Or Li- just for fun, how can you even explain numbers? Numbers have to be real (the building you're in right now would collapse without numbers it was built with) but they're not physical, so how can they be real? Physical things change all the time, but numbers are nonphysical, real, apply everywhere, and never change. What is logic or what are numbers, and where did they come from, if life only exists in the physical? But not only that, it gets worse. According to your worldview, everything comes back to one principle - Survival of the fittest from Charles Darwin. Basically, your mind is the result of blind chance – so how can you trust your own mind? If you bought a computer that you knew had software downloaded at random, would you buy that computer? No, because you know it won't give you good information. Well, your mind is the same way, according to the evolutionary naturalistic worldview. Our minds are a result of blind chance – so really there's no assurance that your mind actually tells you the truth. Maybe we've survived because our minds lie to us, and that helps us survive better. I mean, how do you know that you know anything? An atheistic worldview doesn't let you even know knowledge itself.

Now, as a Christian, I believe that I was made in the image of God, that there are nonphysical things in the universe such as angels, morality, numbers and mind and souls, that logic exists, that it's part of the mind of God. As being made in the image of God, God has imparted to us certain characteristics by which we can know things that are nonphysical. You may not accept my view, of course, but theism seems to make a lot more sense of all these things than an atheistic view. 

The second argument is called the Kalam Cosmological argument. This tends to view the universe as a series of dilemmas. For example, either the universe had a beginning or it didn't. Either the beginning was caused or it was uncaused. And finally, it was either personal or impersonal. Everyone agrees that the universe has a beginning. Not only is it based on everyday experience and scientific evidence - that everything that exists has a beginning somewhere - but there's also something called the Second Law of Thermodynamics. 

The Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that the universe is slowly running out of energy. If the universe had been here forever, it would have run out of energy by now. So we know that the universe had a beginning at some point. So, the universe exists. We established already that if it exists, it has to have a cause for that beginning. Not only that, but experiments by scientists such as Edwin Hubble have shown that the universe had one point where it began expanding, and continues to do so to this day - a caused beginning. This moves us through the second question and brings us to the last. 

Was the universe's cause personal or impersonal? Many scientists like to use the Big Bang Theory. They say that at a point of infinite density, the universe exploded into being. Want to hear something funny, Li? 'Infinite density' literally means NOTHING. It was a point of infinitely dense nothing, since nothing was created yet. Scientists also use that term sometimes for things they know nothing about... for example, there's apparently a point of infinite density at the back of each black hole in the universe. Of course, scientists call black holes an enigma, and really have no idea what's inside of them or even what their function is. So either the universe started itself (it was the cause of its creation - out of nothing) or it had a personal creator...something like God. 

That's all I've got Li. I miss you too.

Chris

I look up at the clock as I sign the letter to finish it, and squeak in dismay. I'm going to be late for work!! I jump up out of my chair, grabbing my coat and an envelope on the way out the door.

Well, I think as I lock the door behind me. Let's hope Liam likes this one, too.