

### Journal Entry: 01/22/2011

Hello. My name is James Peter Matthews. As you might guess from my name, my parents are pretty religious. Trust me – you don't know the half of it.

My parents are proud members of the First Baptist Church of Hillsboro (oh and for the record, there are no second or third Baptist churches in Hillsboro). Mom and Dad are rabid church goers. They go every Sunday (even when on vacation), they go to Bible study, they teach Sunday school, volunteer at the soup kitchen, participate in prayer chains, and the whole bit.

My parents dragged me and my three brothers and two sisters to church every Sunday for as long as I can remember. I had the whole God nonsense drilled into me from the time I could talk. Oh don't get me wrong, it wasn't all bad. The cookies and Kool-Aid that they served at Bible School were actually pretty good. And I also had fun creating some cool crafts out of kernels of corn, but beyond that, it all blew chunks.

When I finally went off to college, my beloved Tech University, I said sayonara to all that God garbage. I was finally free.

OK to be honest. When I started college, I still had the God-wool pulled over my eyes. It was my college roommate, Stan, who showed me the light, so to speak. Stan was as rabid an atheist, as my parents were Christian. I started off defending everything I was taught in church. Like God made the world in seven days. Adam was made from clay and Eve from Adam's rib, and etc. But Stan just picked it apart, citing modern geological findings and evolutionary science.

Well, as you can imagine, I didn't have a leg to stand on. It wasn't too long before I realized the truth. I was fed a load of garbage from a bunch of simple minded people who couldn't accept the fact that God's a myth, and that we are all on our own.

Of course, it wasn't until my senior year of college that I finally confessed to my parents that I was an atheist. My Mom cried for a month, and my name was splattered all over the church prayer lists – _Please pray for James Peter Matthews, who has been led astray at college_. Even my siblings were on my case about it. All in all, it really ticked me off, so I vowed that I would prove to my family that God was a myth.

How did I attempt to do this? Through science of course!

Unfortunately, after a couple months of trying I was still at ground zero. Not that I didn't come up with some excellent evidence to prove that God was a myth, like carbon dating the age of the earth and etc. It's just my family refused to accept the evidence. They would say something like, how do we know that carbon dating is really accurate? Or maybe dinosaurs and man really lived at the same time. Or maybe God planted evidence to make you think that the earth is a lot older than it really is, just to throw the non-faithful off. I was about to give up and simply write off my family as hopeless when I had a stroke of genius – time travel.

I was at my fraternity's annual pre-spring break party (January, we actually have three pre-spring break parties), and thus I was pretty drunk when the idea came to me. Modern science was quickly proving that the Bible was a bunch of bull, but it would still probably be decades before the job was done. I didn't want to wait that long. So what could I do?

The answer was simple. Travel forward in time and bring back the evidence. Of course, the problem with that is time travel hasn't been invented yet. In fact, you can make a strong case that time travel isn't even possible. However my girlfriend, Beth, gave me an idea (Beth was also a little drunk).

"Why don't you just send your future self an email," she laughed, just before throwing up on my shoes and passing out.

Ok, yes Beth had just watched "Back the Future 2," you know Doc Brown sends Marty a message via Western Union from 1885 to 1955. Anyway, as I was cleaning up the mess the idea really sank in. If time travel was really possible, then sometime in the next few hundred years someone is going to discover how to do it. I just needed to figure out how to get a message to someone in the future with instructions to journey back in time with sufficient evidence to prove that God's a myth. In the end, the solution was amazingly simple, which is why most people don't think of it.

The next day I began researching law firms to serve as my vehicle of communication to the future. The firm had to be big enough that I could be reasonably sure that it would be around in 75 years (unlike my Father's attorney who was 55, had no partners, and already had two heart attacks). In the end, I selected the law firm of Lucas, Orson and Scott. So for $300 (my poker winnings from the pre-spring break poker game), an attorney drew-up this simple message that would be delivered to my heirs after my death:

To my Children and/or Heirs:

I, James Peter Matthews, hereby charge you with the following request. While this request may sound odd to you, please do your best to fulfill it, for it is of the upmost importance to me. And if the request is successful, then its outcome would have already affected my life and if you refuse, you could be jeopardizing your own existence.

At some point in the future, perhaps hundreds of years from the time I write this request, 01/27/2011, time travel will be possible. If at the time you read this letter, time travel is possible, then I charge you to travel back and meet with me on Thursday, 02/10/2011, at 1:00 p.m. EST in front of the Tech University library. I will be wearing black sunglasses and my red Cardinal's baseball cap – enclosed are the exact geographical coordinates.

Now the purpose of this meeting is not for you to provide me with who won the super bowl for the next fifteen years or what stocks to invest in. I simply want to discuss with you the existence of God, myth or real, based on the scientific knowledge of your day.

If time travel is not possible in your lifetime, then I charge you to pass along this message to your heirs. Eventually, time travel will be possible and my request will be fulfilled. I know this request sounds odd, but if you have any love for me, then please do your best to carry it out.

Thank you and love,

James Peter Matthews

And that was it. I am sure the attorney who assisted me with the letter thought I was nuts. But who cares, it was done. Now, I simply had to wait the two weeks to see if any of my descendants would honor my requests. While waiting, I vowed to myself to be especially nice to my kids and grandkids, not to mention that I planned to have a lot of them.

All in all, I felt pretty good about my plan. I figured the chances were pretty decent that at least a couple of my children would honor my request, and hopefully one of theirs would as well and etc. So as long as time travel was possible, and the earth didn't get destroyed first, someone with the means to honor my request would eventually receive my message. The only question was – would they care enough to come visit me?

# Journal Entry: 02/10/2011

I left my apartment at approximately 12:40 p.m. to head to the Tech U. library, wearing my sunglasses and Cardinal's baseball cap. I chose the Cardinals because: A. I am diehard St. Louis Cardinal's fan; and B. Tech U. was in Boston, therefore I was probably the only Cardinal fan on campus. After all, I wanted to standout for any visitors from the future.

It was a brutally cold day, with a high temperature of only seven degrees, but I didn't mind that much. After all, with it being so cold there would probably be no one standing in front of the library, which would make it easier for any future visitors to spot me. So you can imagine that I was stunned when I arrived and found not one, but two young men standing in front of the library, both wearing sunglasses and Cardinal baseball caps.

OK, I admit that in my shock at seeing not one, but two guys, wearing Cardinal baseball caps, that I didn't put two and two together to get the obvious four. Instead I was like, what the hell! What are the chances that there would be freaking two other Cardinal fans standing in front of the library?

If my brain had been working right, I would have realized who they must be by their sunglasses and baseball caps alone. But there were more subtle hints that I missed as well; like even though it was only seven degrees outside, they were dressed in shorts and t-shirts. Sure at Tech U., a student standing outside in inappropriate attire was nothing new – but these guys weren't shivering at all. They were calmly standing there, looking around, like it was a balmy 80 degrees. I was about halfway to them, when they noticed me and grinned. It was at this point that my mind realized the obvious and I froze in mid-step.

You would have thought that I would have been a little more mentally prepared, but I wasn't, I was stunned. I couldn't move. I just stood there looking at them. The guys were basketball player tall, with blond, almost crew cut length hair visible underneath their ball caps. They both wore nearly identical St. Louis Cardinal t-shirts, the only difference is one shirt read Galactic Baseball Series Champions 4011 and the other read Galactic Baseball Series Champions 4012.

"James Peter Matthews?" the shorter of the two asked, stepping up to me; he was maybe a few years younger than me. I nodded and he continued, extending his right hand which I tentatively shook. "My name is Aaron Conner Matthews and this is my cousin, Jacob Douglas Ash. We got your message."

They were both grinning broadly now and Jacob added, "I take it you are a little stunned to meet us."

"Well, I guess...I mean...," I started to reply, when a third man who I didn't notice before stepped forward. The third man was nearly as tall as the other two and was perhaps in his fifties; and he was dressed like he was going to a wedding, with blue gray suit and matching bow tie.

"Momentary disconcertment at meeting your future multi-millennial descendants is perfectly normal," the third man said. "Let me introduce myself, I am Professor Albert Phineas III. I am with the Galactic Timeline Integrity Agency, GTIA. And I also teach Middle Earth History and Religious studies at Cambridge. I am here today as the GTIA's representative to ensure that this visit doesn't pollute the time stream."

Pulling out what looked like an iPad from his jacket, he continued. "Not very likely, granted, but you know, agency regulations. It will just be a second." He held up the device like a camera phone and there was a flash. He looked down at the results and said, "Excellent." He then handed the device to me, "Sign here please." Looking down at the iPad I read:

Mr. James Peter Matthews:

The estimated impact of this visit on your projected future results is 0.0000000000012% from the previously observed mean. However this is only an estimate based on a standard tri-timeline scan. While these estimates have proven to be 100% reliable over the previous 125 years and 1,458,645,675 time trips, no estimate can be deemed to be 100% reliable as long as the universal constants remain unknown.

Signing below indicates that you understand that there is a risk, though extremely small, that this visit may alter your future, either positively or negatively, from the previously observed mean. Designated Galactic Time Integrity Agency (GTIA) representative, Professor Albert Phineas III will oversee this time disturbance.

Signee also acknowledges that no future historical facts from this date, 02/10/2011 – 06/01/2375 will be disclosed.

Sign here.

"It is just a standard galactic release form," Professor Phineas said. "You can just use your finger to sign."

"I need to sign a release form?"

"Yes, unfortunately we still have lawyers in the future," the Professor replied with a laugh. Anytime we plan an interactive time disturbance, we scan the complete timeline prior to the trip to document every single event from that moment forward. We then run in-sync model scans with all the variables, planned and random, to analyze the impact of the visit. We then compare the results, anything less than .01% means that there is no noticeable impact on the time stream, and anything less than .0000001% means that there is no noticeable impact on the targeted individual or their descendants. So as you see, this visit in no way impacts your future or the future of your descendants."

"Why is the cutoff 06/01/2375?" I couldn't help, but ask.

"That is the date that mankind switches from a currency to an actions based commerce society," the Professor replied. "It is an extremely fascinating time in man's history."

"Actions based commerce society?"

"Yes," the Professor replied, going into full lecture mode. "You are living in what we in the future call the Currency Age. You buy possessions, based on government established currency. You can grow that currency by investing it, loaning it, gambling it, or even inheriting it – a totally barbaric practice. To think that you actually have thousands of people in your time living in luxury off the great deeds of their parents, grandparents and beyond – ridiculous. On 06/01/2375, currency is abandoned and mankind moves to actions based commerce. It was originally promoted as _Deeds to Dollars._ "

"Deeds to Dollars?"

"Yes," the Professor happily continued. "At that point forward, currency is determined by an individual's contributions to society and is not transferable to anyone. So children of great parents, need to perform their own great deeds if they want to live in luxury."

"Uh-hum, Professor," one of my two multi-millennial offspring (as the Professor had called them), Aaron broke-in.

"Oh right," the Professor replied, looking a little sheepish. "I get carried away sometimes. It's just such a fascinating subject...anyway after 06/01/2375, knowledge of future occurrences can no longer benefit your descendants financially. Any other questions?"

No, I was good. So I signed.

"OK then," the Professor continued. "Let us move this conversation to a more appropriate venue." And with that he motioned for me to follow them into the Library. The Professor and my two multi-millennial offspring, Aaron and Jacob, led me up to the fifth floor, the archives (which was almost always empty) and into a conference room.

Closing the door the Professor produced a cone shaped cylinder. The Professor pressed a button on the cylinder and a green light appeared on the top of the cone. The Professor motioned for me to sit in one of the chairs. "This is a time cylinder," the Professor began. "It enables us to travel both backwards and forwards in time." And with that he placed the device on my head – more precisely it hovered about an inch above my head. The professor then pushed a button on his iPad and there was a flash – and I was now officially a time traveler.
Journal Entry: 06/03/4013

The library conference room had vanished, and I was now standing on the front porch of a house.

At least I thought it was a house. There were subtle differences which took my mind a few minutes to process. You know, it was kind of like when you walk into your room and there is something missing, like say your Green Day poster. You know something is off, but it takes your mind a couple minutes to figure out what's missing. That's just how this felt. The house and porch looked normal enough, just like your typical colonial house, but as I looked around at the other houses, in what I had to assume was a neighborhood, I noticed what was missing. No driveways, no roads, no garages. There were sidewalks and what appeared to be bike paths, and I wondered if this was really some sort of compound; or if the world really did run out of fossil fuels, so mankind was left riding their bikes everywhere.

The Professor, Aaron, and Jacob were in the process of getting up from a bench on the porch, each of them removing a time cylinder from atop their heads. When I glanced above my head, my time cylinder was no longer there.

"Welcome to Springfield, Missouri, 06/03/4013," the Professor said, and motioned to my missing time cylinder. "The time cylinders," the Professor continued. "Project an image of yourself, either forwards or backwards in time. The physical and dimensional concepts involved are more than your 21st century brain, no offense intended, can really comprehend. But in essence, your mind is here in the future, while your physical body is still back in the library conference room. What appears to be your body is actually a Physical Energy Construct, PEC for short. It allows you to physically interact with the environment here, just like we were able to physically interact with you back in your own time."

"Uh-hum, Professor," Aaron interjected again, giving the Professor a slightly exasperated look.

"Oh sorry," the Professor replied, looking abashed. "My excitement has carried me away again." Gesturing to a bench and a couple chairs on the porch, he said, "Let's sit and Aaron can begin."

"OK," Aaron said after we were seated, motioning to a plaque that was sitting on a whicker table. As Aaron motioned, the plaque gently rose off the table and floated over into his hands. Aaron then handed the plaque to me. It was my letter, neatly framed on what appeared to be black velvet.

In my excitement at actually meeting people from the future, I had totally forgotten why I had requested the meeting in the first place. And in all honesty, now that I was here in the future, I had a million other questions besides how can I prove that God's a myth. The first was how had Aaron made the letter float across the room? So I asked, and for a few minutes they humored my curiosity – their answers blew my mind.

For example, the reason why there were no roads is that traveling by car was now obsolete. Using technology similar to the time transporters, people could instantly transport from one location to another. You could even transport between planets, at least within our own solar system. Oh yes, by the year 4013, mankind had achieved inter-galactic travel, and had visited a little over a third of the Milky Way galaxy. I was surprised to learn that we hadn't actually met aliens yet – at least not intelligent life. Apparently mankind had now colonized over three dozen Class M worlds (planets, like earth, that can support life); and while they all had life, likes plants, animals, insects and etc., none of it was intelligent.

The most mind blowing revelation of all was that mankind, in the 3120's, had evolved to the point that people no longer had to consume food for energy. That's right, mankind was now solar powered, drawing energy directly from the Sun and people could do this even when it was cloudy. In addition, as Aaron had demonstrated, powers like telekinesis and flying were now common place. Children were usually able to fly by age two. Jacob showed me a video that his Dad took of him as a toddler, levitating for the first time. It was surreal to watch the toddler wobbly floating into his Mommy's arms.

I could have stayed there all day asking questions, and I wanted to, but the Professor informed us that I only had a little over 50 minutes to still be in the future. So it was time to get to the reason I had asked them to visit me – evidence from the future to prove God doesn't exist.

"For simplicity's sake," Aaron began. "Do you mind if Jacob and me just call you Grandfather?"

"Grandfather?"

"Yes, you are my 70th grandfather on my Dad's side and you're the 70th grandfather on Jacob's mom's side. It will take a lot of time to say great 70 times."

"Why don't you just call me James," I said.

Aaron and Jacob glanced at each other then back at me. "We would prefer to call you Grandfather. I know it may sound a little _dumbar_ , but we think it's important to keep it squarely in our minds that you are our forefather. We're of your direct line, we are...well, we're family."

Well, I wasn't exactly sure what _dumbar_ meant (though I was pretty sure it was future slang for stupid), but I nodded my head that it was Ok for them to call me Grandfather. It was weird to have two guys, that were only a few years younger than me calling me Grandpa, but since it was technically true, what the heck.

"So, Grandfather," Aaron continued. "You wrote this letter to your children and it has been passed down ever since. It has become, as I'm sure you intended, a family tradition. There are now over 300 copies of this letter, but this one, is the original, preserved now for all generations to see."

Wow, I thought. What else is there to say?

"In this letter you asked us to provide you with evidence proving or disproving that God exists," Aaron continued. "Unfortunately, we can provide you with neither. But I can tell you, that just like in your time the majority of the people living today believe that God exists, or at least some divine entity."

"What?" I exclaimed, perhaps a little louder than I would have liked (OK, it was quite a bit louder than I would have liked).

Aaron and Jacob were taken back at my rather loud response, and looked at each other in confusion. Professor Phineas III however merely chuckled.

I felt pretty guilty about my exuberant response. "I am sorry," I said, trying to mollify my tone a little bit. "But how is it that science has not yet proven that God is a myth? I mean you guys can travel in time. You can go back and prove that the world wasn't created in seven days." Aaron and Jacob looked even more confused now, and the Professor chuckled a little louder. "Or," I continued, trying to sound at least a little more objective. "You should have been able to prove that all that really happened, and thus God exists."

"The world created in seven days?" Jacob asked. "You mean like in Genesis?" I nodded my head, and Jacob shared a confused look with Aaron before responding, "But the creation story in Genesis is allegory, it is not an actual factual account of creation."

"Clearly the two of you didn't read all the materials I sent over," the Professor said to Aaron and Jacob. "James is from a period of human history that we call the Theological Dark Ages. The majority of people in this period, at least those familiar with Christianity, Islam and Judaism, believe that the first books of the Bible were meant to be interpreted literally."

"Theological Dark Ages?" I replied, confused. "What do you mean Dark Ages?" I wasn't very happy with the Professor referring to my time period as the dark anything.

"The Theological Dark Ages," the Professor answered. "Refers to a period in mankind's history in which theological understanding takes a step back, so to speak. It starts with the Protestant Reformation in 1517, though it really escalates in the 19th century and is at its peak in the 20th century – and continues through the Great Reunification of 2029."

"Takes a step back?" I asked, still confused on what the Professor was talking about.

"Yes, your statement on the Creation Story is the most famous example," the Professor replied. "Prior to the start of the Theological Dark Ages, it was commonly accepted by theologians that the creation story was allegory, a parable. Saint Augustine of Hippo, a fourth century Catholic bishop, famously wrote about this after years of study. Per Saint Augustine, God did create the universe and man, but the description in Genesis was not an actual account of how it was done, but merely meant to provide the Hebrews with a conceptual foundation of God and the human condition."

"Wait a minute," I replied. "I went to church every Sunday growing up, and I can tell you that everyone in my church believes Genesis is supposed to be an actual step by step account."

"Well of course they do my boy," the Professor laughed. "You are living in the Theological Dark Ages." Seeing my confused and frustrated look, he continued. "James, surely you can see that it would have been impossible for God to explain to the ancient Hebrews – who not only thought the world was flat, but that the stars were just holes in a doom that covered the earth – how He created the universe. Their understanding of science and physics was just too limited. And knowing who created the world was the important thing, not the how. Does that make sense?"

Well I guess, in a way, it did make sense, but I still wasn't convinced.

"James, have you ever studied the Bible?" the Professor asked. "Not just read it, but actually study it?"

"Yes," I lied. I had a Bible that was given to me when I was 13, but I had never actually read it. Of course, I didn't want to admit that to the Professor and my multi-millennial off-spring – especially not after all these cracks about the Theological Dark Ages.

"Good," the Professor replied. "Then you know that interpreting the Bible is difficult. Especially the Torah, the first five books of the Christian Bible. To truly understand the Bible you need to understand the historical context...the culture, customs and practices of the original audience. For that is who that section of the Bible is written for. Make sense?"

"Sure," I replied. I never really thought about it like that before, but it did make sense.

"Good, well one of the foundational principles of the Protestant Reformation was that all truth comes from the Bible. So the Protestant movement encouraged everyone to read and interpret the Bible for themselves. A byproduct of this was the _literaturization_ of Western Europe – for in order to be able to read the Bible, you first need to be able to read – which is a good thing. However it also resulted in a theological decline, for while you had more people reading the Bible, they were not adequately trained in the study of it. In addition, you had a rapid expansion of the number of churches, and the clergy for those churches in many cases came from the congregation itself – this was especially true in America. So you had a combination of a decrease in educational standards of the clergy, and more people interpreting the Bible for themselves, which naturally resulted in a lot of things being misinterpreted. In addition, when you add the scientific revolution to the equation, you have a perceived conflict of ideas that force both sides to extremes."

"I assume, when you say the scientific revolution, you are referring to how science has now disproved most of the Bible? Why do you think I sent the letter in the first place? I was hoping the job would be completely done by this time." Ok, I didn't mean to confess that. When I wrote the letter, I deliberately wrote it so that it would sound like I had an open mind. My future descendants, Aaron and Jacob were giving me completely baffled looks. The Professor on the other hand, merely nodded his head like I had just proved his point.

"You, James, are the perfect example of one of the extremes I was referring to," the Professor continued. "When you attended church, was the creation story discussed much. Or was it mostly the New Testament?"

"Well, it was the New Testament?" I grudgingly agreed.

"And how much of the New Testament has been disproven by the science of the 21st century?"

"Some of it has," I replied.

"Really, which parts?" the Professor asked.

The Professor had me there. I really racked my brain, but while I didn't believe any of it really happened, science hadn't really disproved it. It just sounded too incredible to be true.

"You see," the Professor said triumphantly. "You have gone to the extreme of believing that everything in the Bible is false, just because you were taught that the first few pages in the Bible were literally true. Which, as it turns out, were never meant to be interpreted literally. There are extremists on the other side as well, who cling even harder to the notion that the creation story is literally true, out of fear that if it is not, then the entire Bible must be false."

Ok, I must admit that did make sense, but I still couldn't accept that the creation story had simply been misinterpreted as literally true. I mean, I know there are a number of people out there with no real education, acting like they're experts on the Bible – there were several in my church. But what about the Pope and the Bishops of the really big churches, surely they went through a lot of theological training. So everyone couldn't be as ignorant as the Professor thought.

However, when I said that to the Professor he merely replied, "They are not. James, here is another good example. You are familiar with the Big Bang theory?" I nodded my head that I was. "Well in 4013, the Big Bang theory is still the most commonly accepted theory on how the universe was formed. So let me ask you this question. In your opinion, does the Big Bang theory disprove the creation story in Genesis?"

"Yes," I replied confidently. Now I was getting my bachelor's degree in Computer Engineering, so while physics wasn't my area of expertise, I felt pretty safe that the Professor couldn't turn this one around on me.

"OK," the Professor replied. "So would it surprise you to learn that George Lemaitre, the Noble Prize winning physicists that authored the Big Bang theory, was also a Roman Catholic priest?"

"What?" I replied. I hadn't expected that one.

"Yes, he was a Catholic priest and Pope Pius XII enthusiastically endorsed the theory. Ironically, it was the scientific community who were initially skeptical, because it sounded too much like the creation story."

"How could a Priest...the Pope...that doesn't make any sense. I am definitely going to have to Google this when I get back home."

But one of my descendants did me one better. "Computer," Aaron stated. "Display biography, George Lemaitre." A 40 inch holographic window appeared in front us, displaying George Lemaitre's bio."

"You see," the Professor stated. "This is the theological ignorance I was referring to, which stems from the mistaken belief that the Book of Genesis was meant to be interpreted literally. Do you see my point, or should we bring up Pope John Paul's 1996 endorsement of the Theory of Evolution?"

"The Pope endorsed the Theory of Evolution?" I replied incredulously. "What year was that?"

"1996 – Pope John Paul II endorsed the theory in his address to Pontifical Academy of Sciences. Though more accurately you can say that he just endorsed it as a plausible scientific explanation of the evolution of life, and restated that it in no way conflicted with the creation story, which was never supposed to be interpreted literally."

"That can't be right..." I started to say, but then once again a 40 inch holographic window appeared in front of me with the headline – Pope Endorses the Theory of Evolution. "How come I never heard about this?"

"Well, I am sure it made the news in your time," the Professor replied. "But it probably wasn't a lead item. After all in the late 20th and early 21st centuries it seems like only sex scandals and celebrity gossip grab the headlines. I devote an entire section of my Middle Earth History class to the study of America's bizarre fascination with Brad and Jolie."

Ok at this point I was mentally spent, and the Professor's words troubled me. I admit that much of my skepticism of the Bible originated from my belief that the book of Genesis was supposed to be a factual, step by step account. If it was only supposed to be allegory, then...was everything else true?

"OK," I said. "I will concede, at least for now, that I have mistakenly believed that the creation story was supposed to be literally true. However, just because it was allegorical does not mean that there is a God, and that this is not just all some of sort of cosmic accident."

"Agreed," the Professor stated. "It does not. As Aaron told you. Today, the year 1413, the God question still remains unanswered."

"But how could that be?" I asked, genuinely confused. "I mean you can time travel. Why hasn't someone just gone back in time and verified that Moses didn't part the Red Sea, or that Jesus didn't rise from the grave?"

"People have," Aaron replied. "But the results have been inconclusive."

"How can that be?"

"Well," Aaron replied, excitingly sitting forward in his chair. I could tell this was clearly where he expected the conversation to begin. "Observing historical events can be tricky. First, you have to actually make it to the right place and time. Your directions to us were pretty specific. You told us when and where, and we have very good records of your time period. However, you don't really have any of that before the 18th century. The first timeologists, Albert Dumbar, who traveled back to observe the life of Jesus was off on his calculations by only a week. But that was enough for him to miss everything. He came back and famously reported that Jesus never existed."

"That was a big deal," Professor Phineas said, shaking his head. "It shook the galaxy for about six months, until a rival of Professor Dumbar's, Professor Abigail Grace, made her trip back in time, actually three trips. Professor Grace brought back proof that Jesus did exist, and that poor Professor Dumbar had literally been at the wrong place, at the wrong time. It turns out that he had rushed to publish his findings out of fear that Professor Grace would get there first...poor Dumbar."

"What happened to him?" I asked.

"Complete and total ridicule," Jacob laughed. "He was fired, stripped of his degrees. It got so bad that he had to go into hiding and change his name. Dumbar is now in the Galactic dictionary for shoddy, imprecise observation. Computer."

A 40 inch holograph appeared in front of us with the caption, Dumbar definition. It read:

Dumbar: Shoddy, imprecise observation. Associated with Albert Dumbar's grossly incompetent findings on the historical Jesus on 10/13/3933.

"I know that may sound extreme to you," Professor Phineas said. "And perhaps it was. But you have to understand that our standards for the accurate reporting of information is much higher than in your time, where the news media sensationalizes a story for ratings, and where people are somewhat casual with the truth. So when Dumbar published his findings they were not greeted with the same level of skepticism as they would have been in your time, instead most everyone accepted it as fact. And because such a large percentage of the human race classifies themselves as Christian, it was a significant blow to the collective psyche of mankind. Then when people found out that Dumbar had selfishly rushed to publish his findings because he was afraid of being scooped...well, people were upset. Very, very upset. There was actually some serious talk about whether or not Professor Dumbar should be criminally charged. So all in all, you could argue that Dumbar got off easy."

OK, people in the future sounded a little uptight, but of course I didn't say that. Instead I asked, "If Professor Grace brought back proof that Jesus actually existed, then why is there still a question on whether or not God exists?"

"Because proving that Jesus existed is not the same thing as proving He is divine," the Professor replied. "Even in your time there was enough historical evidence to prove that Jesus existed. The real question is – was He divine?"

"But didn't Professor Grace bring back proof that Jesus performed miracles?"

"No, well at least not indisputable proof," the Professor replied.

"Professor!" Aaron complained.

"Oh, sorry Aaron," the Professor apologized. "Go ahead. This is your RE project." Glancing down at his iPad he said, "Oh, we only have forty minutes left."

"So Grandfather, as the Professor stated," Aaron began. "While Professor Grace brought back visual evidence, it is not indisputable."

"But how can that be?" I asked, and the Professor started to answer before he caught himself and let Aaron respond.

"Because while we have visual evidence that Jesus was crucified, was placed in a tomb, and three days later was not there anymore. We can only view the events, we can't interact with them. For example, we know that Jesus wasn't on the cross long enough for a normal, healthy person to die, but scripture acknowledges this and says that Jesus was granted an early death. We can't very well go up and perform an autopsy on him. And three days later, Jesus' tomb was empty."

"Did anyone see him sneak out?" I asked. "Or see someone remove his body?"

"No, but..."

"Well that sounds pretty conclusive to me."

"Tell Grandfather about time gaps," Jacob interjected.

"I was getting to that," Aaron replied. "So Grandfather, as we were explaining to you before, your mind is here in the future, but your actual body is back in 2011. So, you really haven't traveled to the future, so much as we have transmitted your thoughts into the future. Well the farther back you go, the more static, interference and just plain gaps there are. When you go back just a few hundred years or less, then you can pretty much record the whole event. In your case, 2,000 years in our past, we are normally only able to record events in 45-90 minute intervals, with approximately the same gaps in between. When you go back to Jesus' time, 4,000+ years in the past, we can only record in approximately 15 minute intervals, with an hour gap in between. So timeologists are only able to document about 20% of a given event. Leaving 80% of the event unrecorded, which is a pretty significant gap."

"I am confused, how can there be in gaps in time?"

"Well, think of time as an echo," Aaron replied. "The closer you are to the event itself, the clearer the echo is. The farther away you get, the weaker it gets, till you can't hear it at all. The actual physics of it would be impossible for us to explain to you, even if we had a year, but does this help?"

I nodded dubiously, my ego not liking the implication that my mind couldn't comprehend the physics. Though in retrospect they were almost assuredly correct, after all there is a 2,000 year gap in my education.

"OK, as we discussed," Aaron continued. "Time travel hasn't really added anything to the debate on whether or not there is a God and/or if Jesus is his son."

"Oh sure," Jacob interjected. "Time travel has validated some parts of the Bible and refuted others. For example, Jesus was born on September 22, 4 BCE, not December 25, 1 CE. And eleven years prior to the census described in the Gospel of Luke. But Jesus was still born in Bethlehem, in the home of Joseph's uncle. Whether Mary was really a Virgin or not, who can say."

"Wait a minute," I interjected. "I will concede that it would have been impossible to explain to the early Hebrews how the earth and universe were really made. But now you are talking about the New Testament, the core of the Christian faith. That has to be 100% true, or it's all a big sham. I mean if Mary didn't ride in on a donkey, give birth in a stable, with angels singing, and etc., then it's all a bunch of bull, period!"

The Professor started chuckling again and Jacob said to Aaron. "Wow, Grandfather really is from the Dark Ages."

At this point, I was seriously considering smacking one of my multi-millennial grandkids.

"Sorry Grandfather," Jacob quickly apologized, undoubtedly sensing my mood. "It is just that the Bible doesn't mention how Mary got to Bethlehem, or angels singing in the manger. Those are traditions that have developed over the ages as writers and poets each added their own creative flare to the story."

"The Gospel of Luke," the Professor added, "As with each of the four Gospels, is not a historical account of the life of Jesus. The word Gospel, means the Good News. The Gospels are simply the proclaiming of Jesus' ministry to a specific audience. For example, the Gospel of Matthew was written for a Jewish audience; while Mark, the oldest of the Gospels, was written for the Romans. The Gospels were based on oral traditions and a couple historical accounts, three actually, that didn't even survive the first century, and that have only recently been re-discovered using time travel. Anyway, the authors of the Gospels would understandably change aspects of the story to better relate them to the experiences of the new audience. That, combined with the fact that they sometimes use different sources, is why they sometimes contradict each other."

"What?" I replied, understandably confused. While a Bible scholar I am not, you can't be dragged to a Baptist church by your parents for 18+ years without picking up something. So I am pretty sure that I would have remembered any obvious contradictions.

"Well James, once again you grew up in the Theological Dark Ages," the Professor replied. "You grew up thinking of the Bible as one complete book when in fact it is really 66 books, give or take a book or two depending on whose version of the Bible you are talking about, written by over 40 different authors. Because you think of it as one book, some of the contradictions are difficult to pick up on because your brain naturally rationalizes the differences. For example, the Gospel of Matthew, which as I said was written for a Jewish audience, spends a lot of time talking about how important Jewish law is; where the Apostle Paul in his letters, which were actually written several decades before Matthew, argued that Christians should not follow the Jewish law at all. The most obvious contradiction is that in the Gospel of John, Jesus is resurrected on Saturday, where in the other Gospels it is on Sunday. The Gospels also disagree on who was there first, and what happed immediately after Jesus' resurrection."

"If the books of the Bible don't agree with one another," I replied exasperated. "Then how can they possibly be written by God!" I was getting a little frustrated at this point, and can you really blame me?

"Well James," the Professor replied. "Even in your time, actually well before your time, the consensus amongst theologians is that the Bible is divinely inspired, not dictated. Saint Augustine wrote extensively on this. When the New Testament canon, the 27 books of the New Testament, was eventually finalized the church leaders were quite aware of the discrepancies, and were not overly troubled by them. You have to remember that the people of that time were not as concerned about having all the facts correct, like they are in your day. And of course light years from our standards in the 41st century. To them it was the meaning that was important. They recognized these books as being legitimate sources on the teachings of Jesus, and when you study them as a whole you get a better understanding of God."

"So you see Grandfather," Aaron interjected. "Even the New Testament isn't a completely accurate account of Jesus' ministry. Of course you can say the same thing of other famous people of the time, like Julius Caesar."

"Maybe," I retorted. "But Caesar wasn't claiming to be a God."

The Professor laughed and replied, "But Julius Caesar did claim to be a God. Or at least to be a direct descendant of the Gods, as did many of the Roman Emperors after him. It just never really caught on, historically speaking that is."

My head was beginning to hurt at this point. This traveling to the future, while amazingly cool, was not turning out quite as I expected.

"We can spend weeks discussing the Bible, years even," the Professor stated. "But we have other things to discuss. So let's just leave it at this, the Bible has no more or less factual discrepancies then other accounts of its time, and that such discrepancies, at least by themselves, don't invalidate the respective text. Now, Aaron, please continue."

"So Grandfather," Aaron said. "As I was saying, even with time travel, well time transmitting, we cannot adequately respond to your query. However, in your request you did ask, sort of, to have a conversation with your future descendants about whether or not God exists, based on the scientific evidence of the day. So if it is OK with you. That is what we propose to do...it's kind of my RE project."

"RE project?"

"Yeah RE, Religious Education. This is my senior RE project at JPM Academy."

"Your project is to talk with me about whether or not God exists?" I asked incredulously.

"Well Grandfather you are a special case, being the school's..."

"Aaron!" the Professor barked. "The parameters of this time disturbance!"

"Oh, sorry Professor," Aaron replied. "But it's not like any of this is going to change the time stream. I mean, either way Grandfather is still going to become..."

"That is beside the point," the Professor retorted. "Now you only have thirty-five minutes left, so you better move things along."

"OK Professor. So Grandfather..." Aaron began, but I cut him off.

"Wait a minute, what do I become?" My mind was in a whirl. Did I become some famous scientist? Did I perhaps invent A.I? I couldn't help but wonder what it was that I would do. "What did you mean when you said, being the schools...what?" I pressed. "Did I found the school or something? Is it named after me?"

The Professor shot Aaron a reproachful look. That was it, I thought. JPM Academy, James Peter Matthews Academy – their school was named after me. Wow, I thought. I must do something pretty awesome to get a school named after me.

"OK James," the Professor stated in a firm voice. "We, for your own benefit, are not going to tell you anything about your future."

"Because if I know too much, I could disrupt the time stream?"

"Actually no," the Professor surprisingly replied. "In the tri-timeline scans we account for that possibility, we could let you read your complete bio now, and it wouldn't significantly change your future. No, we will not tell you anything about your future, because it would literally make your life less exciting, for you that is. It is kind of like watching a baseball game in which you already know what the outcome will be. It's just not as much fun. So Aaron, please continue. We have a little over thirty minutes left."

"Right. So Grandfather, are you ready to talk about the nature of God based on the scientific knowledge of our day?"

I nodded my head, and Aaron then began talking more excitedly as the Professor and Jacob retrieved their time transmitters. "So Grandfather," Aaron began, "As I was saying, when it comes to God and Jesus time travel hasn't really proved or disproved anything. The most you can say is that we've confirmed that Jesus did exist and was a religious leader – but in the 21st century you pretty much knew that as well. So what is the 41st century view on God and Jesus? Well, first the basics. The number of people that profess to believe in some sort of divine being is approximately 95%, compared to approximately 90% in your time. Which as far as we can tell, mankind's belief in the divine has always hovered around 90%. The real change is that now 61% of the human race classifies themselves as Christian, almost twice as many as in your time – 24% are Muslim, approximately the same as the 21st century. And the remaining 10% are comprised of Jews, Hindus, and some new religions, which of course you have never heard of, like the Farlandtologists."

"Now, while these numbers are interesting. They basically just tell the same story, that 90% of the human race believes in some sort of divine being, which by all accounts, is roughly the same percentage throughout human history."

Yeah, I thought to myself, 90% are sheep and only 10% use their brains.

"Now as I was saying, all this maybe interesting from an academic perspective," Aaron continued, as the Professor appeared to be punching in coordinates into his iPad, and the light on each of their time cylinders blinked on. "But it doesn't really tell us anything about how the science of the 41st century has influenced our understanding of the divine." Aaron, Jacob, and the Professor now each placed their time cylinder over their heads. "And before we can even talk about how science has influenced our understanding of the divine, we first need to bring you up to date on some of the key scientific advances of the day. And the best way to do that is to show you. Professor, if you please."

The Professor nodded his head and pushed a button on his iPad. There was another flash and suddenly we were in a different dimension.
Journal Entry: Out of Time

The porch had vanished and we were now floating through space, with twinkling stars shining around us. At least I thought they were stars, but as I studied them I realized they were not stars at all. Instead they were tiny balls of light that grew and shrunk in size to a rhythmic pattern that I couldn't hear, but somehow could feel.

It was the most amazing thing I have ever seen. Trust me when I say my description isn't doing it justice. Perhaps if I was a poet I could describe it better. But a poet, I am not. The best I can come up with is that it was kind of like being at a bar, half tanked, dancing to your favorite song. Like I said – I'm no poet.

As I continued to study the lights, taking in their almost hypnotic rhythm, I began to get the impression of people and places coming from each of the lights. As if they were in fact doorways to faraway places, and all I had to do was will myself towards one to go through.

I don't know how long we floated there before I finally ask, "What is this place?"

"We are floating in the time stream," Aaron replied. "We just projected out of our universe."

"Out of the universe?"

"Well, more the fringes out it," Aaron amended, motioning to the balls of light all around us. "This is another one of those concepts that your 21st century mind can't fully comprehend, but in essence, we are floating in time."

"Wow," was all I could mumble, as my mind tried to soak it all in.

The Professor chuckled at my response and said, "OK Aaron and Jacob, I think you have adequately proved your point. Now let's take James to the observation station, he should find the station to be a little less overwhelming."

"Right Professor," Aaron replied, and the Professor pushed another button on his iPad device.

There was another flash, and suddenly we were standing on the observation deck of some sort of space station, looking out a huge panoramic window that had to be at least 60 feet high and twice as long.

Staring out the window I could still see the rhythmic flashing lights of the time stream, but they were now transparent, like a thin veil that separated two distinct halves. On one side of the station, I could see galaxies of stars. Literally galaxies – I could see the Milky Way and Andromeda galaxies, plus thousands more. On the other side, there appeared to be waves of rolling energy. It kind of reminded me of pictures I had seen of the aurora borealis.

"Welcome to the Alpha & Omega Observatory," Aaron stated, gesturing to the window.

"This observatory," Aaron continued. "Is located in the time stream, which borders the two halves of the universe, but it was constructed slightly out of phase so that scientist can better study the time stream and it's interaction with the universe."

"Because it is slightly out of phase," the Professor stated, "You will probably not find it as overwhelming."

Well that was an understatement, I thought to myself. Compared to the overwhelming sensory stimulation of floating in the time stream, this felt dull by comparison. The fact that there were tour groups walking around, or in some cases floating by, reinforced my pedestrian impression. Sure, in retrospect, this was easily the second most amazing thing I had ever seen in my life, but there was a big drop off between number one and two. Now of course the up side of this was that since my brain was no longer getting overloaded, my mind was able to kick back into gear.

"What do you mean the two halves of the universe?" I asked. "Are you referring to matter and anti-matter?"

"No," it was Jacob that responded. "Matter and anti-matter are both components of the Physical plane. Which in your time is what mankind thinks of as the entire universe, but shortly after the Great Reunification of 2029, scientists began to seriously explore a meta-physical model of the universe. It apparently had started back at the turn of the 21st century with String theory, but really exploded after the Great Reunification. You see String theory, and other scientific theories, would mathematically breakdown at a certain point; that is, unless you factored in another plane of existence. Some scientists also began to seriously explore how certain religious concepts, like the soul, might work."

"Please note," the Professor interjected. "This was not the misguided attempts of the Intelligent Design movement that you might be familiar with, which was primarily just an attempt to get equal footing in schools. What Jacob is referring to was a sincere scientific approach of exploring the workings of the universe. In this case, scientists started hypothesizing that if man really had a soul, then there would have to be some connection between a person's physical body and their spiritual. If there was no connection, then a person's memories would be completely lost when they died. So, if man does have a soul, then it has to be connected to its physical body in some way. There was other phenomenon, like mob mentality, that suggested human beings could be influencing one another on a non-traditional physical level. So, some scientists began to seriously explore how this might work."

"Right," Jacob said, taking back over the dialogue. "In the year 2155, Professor Madison Jordan, published her ground breaking theory that she titled the Harmonic Actuality Model, which was later nicknamed by a critic as the Spirit plane theory. In her theory, Professor Jordan detailed out a mathematical model of the universe which contained two overlapping, yet independent halves – planes. While her theory had its fair share of critics, it took off and ironically the name Spirit plane stuck. Professor Jordan's theory wasn't universally accepted until the year 2545, when Physicist Eliza Olivia, managed to detect and record the Spirit plane echoes that Professor Jordan's theory predicted."

"When you say, Spirit plane, do you mean she proved Heaven exists?" I asked, my mind was starting to go numb at the idea.

"No," Jacob replied. "But that is what many people initially speculated the Spirit plane was. However modern scientific theory has provided us with new insights into the Spirit plane. As we said before, your 21st century mind cannot really grasp the physics of the Spirit plane, but for simplicity sake let's just say that our universe is actually comprised of two overlapping planes. The Physical plane, where your body, trees...the moon and etc. reside, and then there is what you might think of as the metaphysical or Spirit plane. Even in the 41st century our understanding of the Spirit plane is limited, for while we can observe its behavior, we cannot directly study it. However we do know that we are connected to it."

"Connected to it?" I asked. Honestly, I found the concept a little overwhelming, and quite frankly if I wasn't standing there, looking out the window at the two distinct planes of existence, I wouldn't have believed it.

"Yes," Jacob replied. "Scientists have proven that we are connected to it, and in a way to each other. Our connection to it is one of the reasons that mankind can now fly, and absorb energy from the Sun. Now this doesn't mean that we have proven that we have a soul, just that our brains are connected to something in the Spirit plane. And that it appears that information flows from our brains into the Spirit plane, and recently we have found evidence which indicates that information may indeed be flowing back into us. Now while this does not prove that we have a soul, it is consistent with modern theories on how a soul would interact with our physical selves. But like I said, there are other explanations as well."

"Such as?" I asked, sincerely curious.

"Well," Jacob replied. "The hardcore agnostics would point out that this could just be the equivalent of a Physical to Spirit plane echo. We, higher intelligent life forms, could simply be creating ripples in the Spirit plane, and all that we are really observing is our mental energies reverberating back to us. There are other explanations as well. As we stated before, we still do not understand all the universal constants. So it could turn out that none of these theories are correct, or even that they are all partially correct."

"Be that as it may," Aaron broke in. "We didn't bring Grandfather to the observation station to discuss 41st century physics, which quite frankly he won't be able to fully grasp."

"Instead," Aaron continued gesturing again to the panoramic view of the two halves of the universe. "We brought you here to prove that – here – actually exists. The universe is really comprised of two halves."

"At least two halves," Jacob muttered.

"Anyway," Aaron continued, giving Jacob a slightly exasperated look. "Grandfather we thought this would be an ideal spot to discuss your questions. The 41st century view of God. I have already given you the general statistics on how many Christians, Muslims and etc. there are. So you know that the majority of mankind still believes in some sort of divine being, or presence, in the universe. And that science, just like in your day, has neither proven nor disproven the existence of a divine being. In fact, the general consensus is that it would be impossible for science to do either; because if God does exist, then He would exist outside our Universe and therefore His presence would be undetectable."

"So Grandfather, where would you like to begin?" Aaron asked.

"Begin?"

"Yes, which topic would you like to discuss first? I mean about the existence of God. The complexity theory, suffering...?"

I think I muttered something like, I don't know, which I admit was a rather lame response. But, like I mentioned before, now that I was here in the future all my questions about God seemed rather mundane. So, I would have been happy to spend my remaining time in the future just staring out the window at the two halves of the universe. Of course, my multi-millennial descendants wouldn't be put off.

"Why don't we start with a couple of the basics," Aaron stated. "The complexity argument and the size of the universe."

"Alright," Jacob replied, pulling out his own iPad like device, apparently to read his notes. "The complexity argument is that the universe is just too complex for it to have occurred simply on its own. In the 21st century, one of the strongest cases for the complexity argument was that if the rate of acceleration after the Big Bang was a fraction greater or smaller than it was, the right proportions of base elements wouldn't have been created to support the formation of matter. In short, there would have just been a bang. So the argument in your time was that the chances of the rate of acceleration occurring at exactly the right speed were so small, that it was statistically zero. So therefore there had to be a creator involved."

I nodded my head, though I hadn't really heard that argument before. I must admit that I was so tied up in thinking that the Creation Story was supposed to be literally true, that the idea that the Big Bang could have been how God did it, never even occurred to me.

"Well about 500 years into your future, mankind discovers how to recreate the Big Bang, at what you think of as the sub-atomic level," Jacob continued.

I was both amazed and at the same time I wasn't. After all, I knew scientists were already experimenting with particle accelerators in an attempt to recreate some of the conditions of the Big Bang. "Wait a minute," I said. "Are you saying that mankind is in the process of creating sub-atomic universes?"

"No," Jacob answered. "At least not yet, scientists have run over 4,300 Big Bang simulations over the last 1,500 years, and the outcome has always been the same. All the right elements, but nothing takes shape. But what we have discovered is that the rate of expansion is constant. In short, once you actually have the bang, the rate of acceleration is always the same. Does that make sense?"

"Yes," I replied. "So in the 41st century you have proven the complexity argument to be false."

"Not exactly," Jacob continued. "Scientist can create sub-atomic Big Bangs, but we are the initiating force, the creator if you will. At this point, we still do not understand how you could have a spontaneous bang, but we do know once a Big Bang starts the rate of expansion is exactly the same. Now let's continue. In the 21st century, one of the strongest cases against the complexity argument was that the earth was so remote in the universe, and that man was basically a microbe on it. In short, if there was a creator, mankind clearly was not the object of his creation. In the 41st century, this has now become the strongest points for the complexity argument. As we told you earlier, mankind has now achieved inter-galactic space travel. We have explored almost a third of our galaxy, but none of that would have been possible if all the prime elements needed for anti-fission propulsion couldn't be found in our solar system. In short, without iron from Mercury, carbon from Venus, vibranium from Jupiter and a dozen other elements, anti-fission couldn't be achieved and we would have been stuck, so to speak, in our own solar system. So far, ours is the only solar system that we have found that contains all the necessary elements. So today, many people argue that this is indeed proof that mankind's origin on earth was not accidental."

"Scientists also predict that we will have the entire Milky Way galaxy mapped out in the next 100 years," Jacob continued. "And today we are getting back data from trans-galactic probes that were launched fifty years ago. In short, the universe doesn't seem quite as big to us today, as it did in your time."

"Right," Aaron agreed. "So by the 41st century the strongest case for the complexity argument in your day is now the weakest, and what was the weakest, is now the strongest. Who knows, in another 2,000 years the reverse could be true."

OK, I could see their point. After all the size of the universe is a matter of perspective. For example, if the first Homo sapiens knew how big the earth really was, it would have seemed infinite to them, but it was starting to feel a little crowded to us in the 21st century. But as interesting as these arguments may be – and I admit they were interesting – they still didn't sway my position in the slightest.

"So what topic would you like to discuss next?" Jacob asked. "Soul theory, the Divine Truth, Moral law, Suffering, Inverse Chaos Theory..."

"Suffering," I replied, grasping onto a topic that I at least recognized.

You know, as I recall my tip into the future I think Aaron, Jacob, and the Professor must have thought I was a little on the slow side, but in my defense, I was being bombarded with so much information that my mind was literally being overloaded. I mean case in point; I went from Boston to 2000 years into the future, then to a space station on the fringes of our universe – that was literally outside of time. I mean come on, that was all mega cool, but it was also mega overwhelming. So in retrospect, I didn't really care to talk about whether human suffering disproved the existence of God or not, but it was a least a topic that I was familiar with.

"Ok, suffering is one of the leading con arguments in your era and ours," Aaron began. "Though it really is a poor argument against the divine."

"What do you mean it's a poor argument?"

It was Jacob who responded, "The suffering argument is really more of a debate on the nature of God, not whether or not He exists; because there is no logical tie between suffering and the existence of the divine."

"Right, it really is just a question on whether or not God is All Powerful, All Knowing and All Good," Aaron agreed. "Or to put it another way, is there any meaning to suffering?"

"Meaning to suffering?" I asked, skeptically.

"Yes, everyone suffers and eventually dies. Some people may suffer more than others, but the end result is still the same. We all die. The con argument, against an all Good, all Powerful, and all Knowing God, is that suffering is meaningless and disproportionate, i.e. some people suffer a lot more than others. The common Christian response to these arguments are that the Bible clearly tells us that we will all face trials in our lives, and that Jesus himself was betrayed by his friends, tortured, and unjustly executed. And that these trials push us out of our comfort zone, help us to grow, and bring us closer to God. And finally, that human life is finite, we will all die, but we will live forever in the next life."

"As you see," the Professor added. "This question really hasn't changed since your time. At its core, it is still just the basic question on whether or not life has meaning."

Well that was interesting, but as I said, I didn't really care that much about the suffering topic, mainly because I could see their point. After all, if God did exist and there was an afterlife, then any good person that suffered and died wasn't really dead. So in the grand scheme of things, what difference did it really make? I know some anti-Christian blogs and authors try to make a big deal of it, but I always found their arguments to be shortsighted. There are plenty reasons to not believe in God without trying to apply man's finite view of life to an infinite existence. Heck for all we know, how much you suffered in this life could be something to brag about in the afterlife.

Another argument that many atheists authors and anti-Christian blogs would beat the drums on was all the violence, and wars, that occur in the name of religion. This was another argument that never held much sway with me. I had watched enough History Channel specials to know that mankind doesn't need religion to justify waging war on one another. Sure religion has been a convenient tool to help justify a war, but mankind has always been good at coming up with reasons on why it was OK to kill or oppress other groups. So, at least in my opinion, it was grossly naïve to believe that violence and war would be even marginally less if religion didn't exists. So with that said, what did I want to talk about? After all, this was a once in a lifetime opportunity.

As I tried to gather my thoughts I looked around the observation station, and I marveled at how awe-inspiring and yet ordinary the setting was. Sure I was on a space station on the fringes of time and space, and that of course was awesome. But as I watched the tour groups walking or floating by, I couldn't help but be reminded of all those field trips I took as a kid in school. Many of the teenagers were goofing off, or acting like this was the lamest place in the universe, while the younger kids ran about and pointed excitedly out the window. They seemed so ordinary, that it was almost laughable.

As I studied them, an idea began to form in my mind. The people in the future maybe literally light years ahead of us in the 21st century, but in some ways they were no different than us and maybe not as advanced in others. Perhaps mankind in the 41st century had simply been blinded by their many achievements, and needed a little dose of 21st century practicality. Maybe I could be the spark from the past that could ignite the fires of enlightenment, which would lead them to the obvious conclusion that God is a myth that man invented so that we could sleep better at night.

"OK," I began. "You make some valid points about the size of the universe and suffering. However those are all beside the point. The real question is why do people in the 41st century still delude themselves into believing that God really exists? I mean come on, isn't it obvious that mankind, throughout our entire history, has been looking for someone to protect us from dangerous beasts, nature, disease and of course, from each other. Mankind invented the concept of God as a security blanket to allow us to think there was something in this universe that could protect us from the cold harsh world. The belief in God is no better than a small child pulling his blankets over his head to protect himself from the monsters under the bed."

"In the 41st century," Aaron replied. "We commonly referred to this argument as the Great Delusion. And not much has changed in the last 2,000 years. As you stated, there is no definite proof in the existence of the divine. So it is possible that when you die you are not reborn, there is no afterlife – you cease to exist, period."

"Yes," I agreed and not wanting to lose momentum, for as I learned on the debate team the best way to win an argument is to attack, attack, attack, I added. "And no offense, what confuses me is, well...I thought people would be a lot smarter in the future. I mean, I know you can fly, move stuff around with your minds, and absorb energy from the sun, but..."

"Why do so many people delude themselves into believing in God?" Aaron continued, with a grin. "Well I completed my doctoral thesis on this exact subject."

"Doctoral thesis?"

"The educational standards of the 41st century are a little more advanced than in your time," the Professor replied. "In the 41st century, a young person achieves the equivalent of a PhD when they graduate High School."

"High School?" I replied, incredulously.

"Oh yes," the Professor continued. "Of course since everyone gets one, we don't go around calling people Doctor, like in your day. But the term doctoral thesis has carried through the centuries, and the course work is equivalent to your time, actually probably a little higher. So Aaron here, at age 18, has a PhD in Psychology and Jacob a PhD in Physics. By the time they graduate from college, they will most likely have anywhere from 4 - 6 PhD degrees."

Well, in the grand scheme of everything else I learned about the future, everyone having multiple PhD degrees wasn't really that surprising – especially compared to the ability to fly.

"OK, so as I was saying," Aaron continued. "I completed my doctoral thesis on whether or not the concept of God was created by man's subconscious. The most famous proponent of this theory is of course Sigmund Freud, who speculated that mankind's belief in God was a delusion created by our subconscious need for a supreme Father figure."

This of course, I knew. Freud's views on religion were often quoted by some of the atheist blogs that I read. Not to mention my old college roommate, Stan, loved to quote Freud.

"However the reason his theory is so famous is not due to its acceptance by psychologists, but because Freud is arguably the most famous psychologists in the history of mankind. Ironically, Freud's theory is widely rejected as the reason mankind believes in God, but it is accepted as why many people are atheists. And Freud himself is sighted as the stereotypical example."

"What?"

"Well," Aaron continued. "The notion that mankind created the concept of a divine being, or beings, to serve as a father figure, sounds good, but is not historically or scientifically supported. Not to say that man's desire to have life mean something, and for life not to end at death, doesn't reinforce a religious mindset – it is just not the cause. For example, in your time the majority of people are born into a religious belief system. They don't just make it up. And the origins of mankind's two largest religions, Christianity and Islam, are historically well documented – and clearly not the result of a need to create a supreme father figure. Even when you look at the earliest religious practices, many did not center on a specific divine presence, but instead on a desired behavior. In fact, you can argue that most religions share a common trait on how mankind should behave. Some theologians have argued that this is indeed proof of a divine calling. As the famous author of your time C.S. Lewis, wrote..."

"C.S. Lewis was a little before James's time," the Professor interjected.

Which was true, but I had seen a couple movies based on his books.

"Oh, sorry," Aaron replied. "Well anyway, C.S Lewis argues in his book, Mere Christianity, that it is the divine calling that causes mankind to search for God and establishes the moral law that we all seem to inherently know."

"Moral law?" I asked.

"This is the theory that everyone is born with the inherent knowledge of right and wrong, and that in many cases it is not what we would like to do," Aaron replied. "C.S. Lewis argues that a powerful person may desire to take his neighbor's possessions, but inherently knows that this is wrong. Not to say that he still wouldn't do it, but if he does, he would make excuses on why he was justified to do it. As C.S. Lewis observes, when you study the different cultures through mankind's history you find the same moral themes in their stories, art and religions. Like greed is bad, charity is good, and etc. C.S. Lewis argues that this repeated moral theme, a theme that at times everyone finds inconvenient or impossible to follow, is indeed proof of a divine call. Many also argue that this divine calling is why nearly 90% of the population believes in a divine presence."

I have to admit that was an interesting argument, and I had never really thought about it before. The human notion of fair play and the golden rule were in fact counter evolutionary behavior, meaning that such actions didn't promote the propagation of the smartest and strongest of the species. However I still didn't really get how Freud's theory applied to atheism, and I asked just that.

"Well," Aaron replied. "In general, you can break atheists into four basic groups: the pure-atheists – sometimes called the religious-neutral, the anti-religious, the religious-skeptics, and the ego-atheists. The pure-atheists, or religious-neutral, are individuals who arrive at their beliefs through an un-bias observation of the facts. In layman terms, this simply means they are not carrying around emotional baggage that is influencing their beliefs. Most atheists would classify themselves in this group, but many are not. In fact, someone with this mindset is much more likely to be agnostic, than an atheist."

"The anti-religious atheists," Aaron continued. "Are people who, for a variety of different reasons, view religion, or the notion of God, in a negative light. Freud, who was vehemently anti-religious, is the stereotypical example of this group. As the famous 22nd century Psychologists Cora Vivian wrote, the greater their vehemence against religion the more likely their belief is a sub-conscious response to a negative set of events in their lives. In the case of Freud, who wrote that he disliked his father, and was a Jew watching the rise of anti-Semitic behavior in Germany, he would understandably have a subconscious predisposition against a supreme Father figure. Clues to this type of atheists are in their writings and behavior; if they make angry, derogatory comments about religion, then there atheism is most likely the product of conscious or subconscious bias."

"The religious-skeptics are generally classified as people whose atheism is driven by a subconscious fear that a divine being may not exist. So in short, they give up on God before God can give up on them. This is a psychological disorder that most people suffer from, to varying degrees, and often has no impact on their theistic beliefs. As Dr. Vivian wrote, sometimes we all find that it is easier to just give up on something, than to live in fear of it giving up on us. Dr. Vivian also wrote that many people who are raised in a particular faith will go through a period of religious skepticism as they transition from adolescence into adulthood. Per Dr. Vivian, it is very common and normal for young adults to question, and even reject for a time, many of the values and beliefs that they were taught as a child."

"Now the last group, ego-atheists," Aaron continued. "Are individuals who have a form of low self-esteem that results in their ego not accepting that anything can be smarter or more important than themselves. Or, that cannot accept the fact that there are things beyond their ability to understand and control. Therefore they construct a belief system that allows them to feel that they have greater control over their own lives."

"Well I have never heard of that argument before," I retorted. "Atheists don't suffer from low esteem issues. They are simply people who have outgrown the need for God."

"So Grandfather with all due respect," Aaron replied. "Your response is the textbook example of what Dr. Vivian predicts an ego-atheist would give when they are challenged on their beliefs. An ego-atheist might say that they don't need God, but that is in itself an illogical statement. Without God, in theory, your existence ends at death. So unless you sincerely want that, you need God or at least some divine entity. Now you could say..."

"That's not want I meant," I interjected, I admit a little heatedly. I swear talking with my multi-millennial grandsons was almost as frustrating as talking with my parents and siblings. "What I meant, is that they have outgrown the need to believe in something to just give them comfort in their lives. They can look our eventual oblivion squarely in the face and not blink."

"Well as in everything, these are general classifications," Aaron replied. "Some people fit neatly into one of them and others do not. The personality that you describe could be an ego-atheist, a religious-skeptic, or even a pure atheist. It just depends on what the primary driver behind their belief is. Your choice of the word – need – is telling though. When you use need in this context you are referring to what you perceive is a weakness. For example, if you say I don't need other people's approval to feel good about myself. You are implying that there are people who do, and that these people have a weakness that you do not. It is not just a statement of fact. A pure-atheist may say something like this, but most likely wouldn't, they tend to be less confrontational of opposing beliefs, because their belief isn't the result of conscious or sub-conscious bias."

"Grandfather what type of atheists would you classify yourself as?" Jacob asked, with a grin.

Yes, Jacob and Aaron were just as annoying as my siblings and parents, I thought. Of course I didn't say that to them. Instead I went on the offensive, "You may have clever names for atheists, but what about the religious? How about the gullible, naïve, uneducated, deluded, fanatical and just plain nuts?"

To my surprise, Aaron calmly replied, "We do. There is the ego-religious personality which, similar to the ego-atheist, is a person with a form of low self-esteem that results in a close minded – I have to be right attitude. In other words, I am the supreme authority and anyone who disagrees with me is wrong – end of story. Their ego simply cannot accept that they might not be correct. In fact, someone with this disorder may indeed argue with people who even agree with them, because in their mind – they have to be the supreme authority."

"There is also the holier-than-thou personality," Aaron continued. "Which is often driven by a need to cover up their own shortcomings."

"Shortcomings?"

"Yeah," Aaron replied. "You know, if I point out everyone else's faults loudly enough, then maybe nobody will notice my own. There are also the agenda-pushers, people who warp their religious beliefs around the social or political agendas that they want to promote. Now while the ego-religious, holier-than-thou personalities and agenda-pushers are the most common negative religious personality types, they only represent a small, though often loud, minority of the religious population. Now for the rest, we can break them into the following three categories: the immature, maturing and mature. The religious immature are people who just believe what they were taught as children and never explore their faith beyond that. So in a sense, they are just children in their faith, they simply believe what they are taught, and never question or explore beyond that."

"Yeah," I said. "That sums up my family."

"The maturing," Aaron continued. "Are individuals who have begun questioning and exploring their faith. And the mature, are those individuals who have reached their theistic views after a thorough exploration of their faith."

"What do you mean, questioning their faith?" I asked. "Do you mean they quit being Christian or Muslim for awhile?"

"No," Aaron replied. "Though in some cases that is true, but for most it is not. It just means that they make an active effort to explore their faith, not just accept what they were taught by others."

Ugh, I thought to myself, as my frustration mounted. "OK, it is great that people in the 41st century have a hundred different ways to classify someone's religious beliefs, or lack thereof, but this isn't going anywhere. And quite frankly, I am still at a loss as to why people in the future could still be gullible enough to believe in God."

"I thought people in the future would be more logical," I continued. "I mean, regardless of any conscious or sub-conscious drivers, or whether or not there is any value to suffering, or anything else, it is still just tap dancing around the obvious question."

"Which is?" the Professor prompted.

"OK," I replied, rising to the challenge with what I thought was my best argument. "Why would God create the universe, and then leave us with no definite proof that He exists? That just doesn't make any sense. Therefore, how can you not conclude that God is a myth? Why delude yourself?"

"Well Grandfather you raise a very good point," Aaron replied.

"It's a point that everyone must concede is a real possibility," Jacob agreed. "But it is a little dumbar as well, no offense."

"What Jacob means," Aaron clarified. "Is while you have to concede that it is possible that the universe, regardless of how complex, was created by accident; you also have to concede that if a divine being did create the universe that being would be infinitely smarter and wiser than ourselves, and thus could have a multitude of reasons why He would deliberately make His existence ambiguous to His creation."

"Why would God want to make His existence ambiguous?" I retorted.

"Free will and trust are the two most accepted reasons," Aaron replied.

"Free will and trust?"

"Sure, those arguments have been around forever..." Aaron started to say, then, looking at me, amended it. "Well, maybe not forever."

"The free will argument," Jacob began. "Pretty much states that everyone would behave differently if they knew with 100% certainty that an all knowing, all powerful, all good God exists. Think about it. How different would life be in your time if everyone knew that God was watching and judging their every move?"

I had to admit that this was an intriguing question. Life would be completely different. You wouldn't have CEO's thinking of their pocketbooks first and the environment second. There would be no wars, no riots, no random acts of violence. "I concede that life would be completely different, it would be nearly perfect," I replied.

"Would it be?" the Professor asked. "What is the merit, the value in somebody doing the right thing, because they know they will be punished if they don't? Also, how many people would just wait around for the almighty God to solve their problems for them, as opposed to solving it themselves? That is the free will question. Assuming that God created us for a purpose, a purpose beyond simply existing, then there are a multitude of reasons why God would give us free will."

"The Trust argument," Aaron interjected. "Follows the same line of reasoning as the free will argument. If God created mankind for a purpose, beyond simply to exist, then in this life He must be molding us, teaching us, shaping us for that purpose. C.S. Lewis referred to this as the long, painful process of making us perfect. The Trust argument basically states that God is testing us in this life to make sure that we will do the right things, with limited power and supervision, so that we can be trusted to do more with less supervision in the next. It's kind of like a parent giving their children a small amount of freedom and responsibility. Once they prove they can be trusted with that, the parent gives the child more and more. So that hopefully someday, they will become a responsible, trustworthy adult. Does that make sense?"

"Yes, I guess it does, but I think it's a major stretch. Look, maybe you are right and there are a multitude of reasons why God would have created the universe and yet decide to keep His presence ambiguous. But come on, Occam's razor, the simplest explanation is most likely the correct one, and the simplest explanation is that we are only here through a cosmic accident, there is no God – we are on our own."

"Actually Grandfather," Jacob replied. "Occam's razor states that if multiple theories are more or less equal, then the one with the least new assumptions is most likely correct. If you sincerely apply Occam's razor, a Creator of the universe theory actually has less new assumptions than the cosmic accident theory, at least from a human perspective."

"I am not following you at all," I replied. "How can you say that the universe occurring on its own has more new assumptions than God creating it?"

"OK," Jacob replied. "Let me put it another way. Regardless of whether or not there is a God, we, human beings, cannot fully understand how the universe could have come into being on its own – without at least some initiating force. A creator would be that initiating force. Some scientists have speculated on a steady state universe."

"Steady state?"

"Meaning the universe always existed – has no beginning or end. Albert Einstein originally included a fudge factor in his Theory of Relativity, to reflect a steady state model. He later retracted it, and confessed that he only included it because he didn't like the idea of their being a Creator. Anyway, a Steady State universe model has been a point of speculation for 2,000+ years, but nothing more than that. As in your time, the Big Bang theory is still the leading scientific theory on how the universe came into being. Many argue that the Steady State theory is just an attempt to avoid the Nothing-from-Something argument."

"Nothing-from-Something?"

"Yes, in other words, from a human perspective everything in the universe has a beginning and is created from some base elements. The one exception to this is the origin of the universe itself, which as far as we can tell was created from nothing. Which from a human logic perspective is not possible, thus supernatural; or to put it a different way, is a miracle – the first miracle."

"A miracle?"

"Sure, by definition a miracle is a beneficial event that cannot be explained through our scientific understanding of the universe. Now to be fair, the Nothing-from-Something argument still exists with a Creator, for where did the Creator come from? So many philosophers, and now even some scientists, speculate that at some level of existence there is a steady state plane which all other planes, universes, originate from. In fact, I am going to be attending a lecture next month by renowned Physicist Melanie Avery on this very topic. It is fascinating stuff. In fact, when you start looking at the universal constants from a meta-..."

"Jacob, you are getting off topic," Aaron interjected. "Grandfather isn't going to be able to comprehend the physics involved; in fact, I don't even pretend to understand them."

"Wait minute," I replied. "Do you mean meta-universe or multi-verse theory? The theory that there are an infinite number of universes." I had read a couple articles on meta-universe theory, and was at least casually familiar with the principles involved.

"No," Jacob replied. "Meta-plane is the theory that our universe originates from a completely different plane of existence, whose physics are completely different from our own. Meta-universe is a completely different concept, which quite frankly has never gained much scientific credibility. In fact, meta-universe is often cited as an example of how scientists can fall into the trap of trying to use infinity to explain the mathematically improbable."

"What do you mean?"

"Oh just like it sounds," Jacob replied. "It goes back to the old complexity of the universe argument. If you only have one universe, then the chances that it would form on its own at exactly the right speed to support life is statistically zero. But if you have an infinite number of universes, then it would be guaranteed. However, there is no scientific data to support this theory. It was just a misguided attempt by some scientists to apply infinity to the equation to get the answer they wanted. Anyway, as we have already discussed, there is no need to get exotic to explain the rate of expansion, once you have – the bang – the rate of the expansion is the same."

"Are you almost finished?" Aaron complained to Jacob. "We only have ten minutes left."

"Oh sorry," Jacob replied, sheepishly. "I guess the Professor isn't the only one who gets carried away sometimes. Anyway back to Occam's razor. Since the creation of the universe, either a cosmic accident or created by a divine hand, defy our ability to explain through our knowledge of the universe – they are both by definition supernatural explanations. Of which, a divinely created universe actually has less new assumptions, even when you factor in that God's existence also defies human explanation."

"Huh?"

"Sorry, I am not explaining this very well," Jacob replied. "Let me put it another way. If you prescribe to a steady state model for the origin of reality, which as I said some scientists in our time do, then you acknowledge that the nature of reality so far exceeds our ability to comprehend that anything could be possible. So a divine origin of the universe and accidental creation are equally valid theories. Now if you believe that reality had a beginning, then you believe an event occurred which resulted in either the creation of God or resulted in the Universe itself. By definition an event which results in the creation of one thing, has less new assumptions that an event that results in the creation of many things. Does that make sense?"

No, it doesn't, I thought to myself. I mean it does if you accept the notion that the universe coming into existence on its own was supernatural, but there was no way I was conceding that. At the same time, I could see that arguing about it was pointless, so I shifted to a new line of reasoning. "Look, we could argue about this all day, but the burden of proof falls onto you to prove that a mythical God exists, not me."

"Ok, Grandfather," Aaron replied. "The best argument for the divine in the 41st century is probably the best argument in your time as well – the divine truth. In short, it just feels right."

"What?" I replied, totally taken back by Aaron's statement.

"Oh come on, are you really telling us that in your entire life you have never felt it – the divine truth. That in all the years you went to church, or simply living life, you never felt It...that overwhelming sense that there is more to the world than what you can see, the feeling that there is something with you, guiding you?"

"No, of course I haven't," I replied, though I admit that was not a completely honest response. When I was much younger, and the God-wool was still pulled over my eyes, I would have answered yes, but that was back when I was an ignorant, trusting child.

"Really?" Aaron asked, genuinely confused.

"No, at least not since I became a thinking adult," I conceded.

"So you mean, not in the last three years or so?" Jacob asked. "Since you became an atheist?"

Now in retrospect, I don't think Jacob meant that as a smart-aleck comment; I think it was really just more of an observation, but at the time, I once again was tempted to strike one of my multi-millennial descendants. Of course I didn't, instead I said. "Look, if you are simply telling me that some people claim to have had a religious experience in church then you are wasting your breath. Oh sure, I do not doubt that some Christians have had religious experiences at church or in a hospital, but I am also sure that is true for Jews, Muslims, Hindu's as well. Not to mention that people can have religious like experiences playing music, looking at art and etc. So, trying to claim that God exists because some Christians claim to have had a religious experience is totally ridiculous!"

"Is it really?" Aaron calmly replied. "Why is that?"

"Well, like I said," I replied. "They are Jews, Muslims, and Hindu's that would also claim to have religious experiences. You can't all be right?"

"Really, why not?" Aaron replied. And I was taken back by his calm, I know something that you clearly do not, attitude.

"God has a plan for everyone," Aaron continued. "Not just Christians or Muslims or Jews, but everyone. God is everywhere – His subtle call goes out to everyone. The divine truth is there for anyone who can calm their mind long enough to listen, and quite frankly, even those who can't. So the person who has a religious like experience sitting in a concert hall listening to Bach, may indeed be hearing the divine call of God – the divine truth, even if they don't consciously realize it. This is the real reason why the majority of people believe in a divine presence, they experience it in their lives, even if it is only at a subconscious level."

I was initially taken back by the absurdity of the statement. "Look," I began. "That's a nice thing to say, but everyone in my church would tell you that if you don't believe that Jesus is the Son of God, then you are going to Hell."

"Well of course they do," the Professor chimed in with a laugh.

And I knew exactly what he was going to say before he said it – "You are from the Theological Dark Ages." Not that again, I silently groaned to myself.

"Don't worry," the Professor said, needlessly trying to console me. "Mankind is on the verge of leaving the Theological Dark Ages. In fact, the process is well on its way in your time. And we have now touched on the second, and the most important truth that will lead mankind out of the Theological Dark Ages – Heaven is for everyone."

"What?" I exclaimed.

"Heaven is for everyone," the Professor calmly repeated. "Or to put it a different way, God is the God of everyone, not just Jews, Christians and Muslims. As Aaron was just saying, God, Jesus, or whatever other name He may go by, has a plan for everyone. This truth appears throughout the Bible, both Old and New Testament, but has gotten lost over the ages."

Seeing my confused look the Professor continued, "For example, John 6:47 – He who believes in Me will have ever lasting life – is actually a mistranslation. The correct translation is – he who follows Me will have ever lasting life. Someone who believes that Jesus is the Son of God, but ignores His teaching and does evil things, is obviously not a follower of Jesus. Where someone who is charitable, compassionate, loving is performing the will of God, and thus is a follower of Jesus, even if they don't realize it or acknowledge it. Jesus explicitly points this out in his parable of the Good Samaritan, where a wounded traveler is ignored by a priest and a Levite – Holy men of God – and yet aided by a Samaritan – a second class citizen in the minds of most Jews of the time – who tended the man's wounds and took him to an inn to be cared for. As Jesus said, which of these did God's will? This is just one of the examples from scripture that illustrate how someone can be a servant of God even if they don't consciously realize it, or even deny it."

"What? Are you saying that an atheists who is charitable and loving, is actually a servant of God?"

"Well, in short, yes," the Professor replied. "But unfortunately we can't really go into too much more detail on it."

"Why is that?" I asked.

"Well for two reasons," the Professor stated. "The first is that this topic ties in too closely with some of those near future events that we are not allowed to discuss with you."

"What do you mean..." I started to say, when suddenly everything flashed like static on television.

"What was that?" I asked.

"That is the second reason," the Professor replied calmly. "We are out of time."

I was momentarily taken back at this; I didn't want to leave yet. I had so many more questions.

"James, it's been a pleasure meeting you. Hopefully you enjoyed your trip to the future." The Professor said, extending his hand.

"Can I come back?" I asked quickly.

"Unfortunately no," the Professor responded. "The Agency has strict rules on repeat trips. Aaron, Jacob and their parents had to cash in a lot of deeds just to get this trip authorized."

The world flashed again. This time the flash lasted a couple seconds longer.

"Goodbye Grandfather," Aaron said. "It was really good to meet you. Sorry if we couldn't give you the answers you were looking for, but the truth is the truth."

"That's OK... " I started to say, then there was another flash.

"Goodbye Grandfather," Jacob shouted, just before the final flash, and I was suddenly back in the library conference room. My time traveling was over.

I sat there for a couple hours afterwards, making notes on huge sheets of white paper that were in the conference room. A couple days later, I decided to write it all down in this journal, making sure that I not only capture the specifics of the trip, but my emotional state as well. For you see, I had an epiphany of sorts. My time traveling days may be over, but this journal could be another vehicle of communication to the future. After all, my letter had survived to reach the year 4013, why couldn't this journal?

And who knows, maybe I will even add to this journal as the years go by.
Journal Entry: 02/10/2012

Today is the one year anniversary of my trip to the future, and I'm now in grad school at TLT Institute of Technology. If you are wondering if my trip to the future has changed my perspective on God, let me assure you that it hasn't. I am still an atheist, though hopefully a smarter one.

Since last year, I have read C.S. Lewis's "Mere Christianity," and while parts of it are interesting, C.S. Lewis arguments are not strong enough to sway me. One of my bible thumping fraternity brothers, Rich, loaned me a book by geneticists Francis Collins, "Language of God, A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief." That book was also interesting, though once again, it didn't sway my position.

However one of Dr. Collins's points did resonate with me and that is – science and religion are not opposing viewpoints. They are actually completely independent of one another. If you really know your theology, then you know (as I do now) that the Bible does not in any way conflict with the scientific findings of today. If there is a God, then He would be outside of His creation. So, unless God wanted to, His presence, His actions, would be undetectable. For example the Big Bang theory, the physics behind the Big Bang are the same regardless of whether or not God initiated it or it happened spontaneously on its own. The problems between religion and science have occurred when people have fallen back on trying to explain the unknown by simply saying that God does it, the old God of the Gaps explanations. The problem with that, as Dr. Collins points out, is what is scientifically unexplainable today will most likely be explainable sometime in the near future. Those bible thumpers trying to prove God exists through Intelligent Design are heading down a dangerous, and all too familiar path, by needlessly trying to prove that God exists through science, they are only creating points of potential conflict and misunderstanding.

In short, if God exists then He exists. Science can't prove or disprove that. It can only improve our understanding of ourselves, our world and our universe. So, if you want to study science just to learn how the universe works, that's awesome. If you want to study science so that you can learn how God created everything, that's cool too.

Anyway, as I said I am still an atheist, and I am sure I will be one for the rest of my life. After all, I have the Professor's assurance that my visit to the future would not change my destiny.

So, have I convinced my family that God is a myth? No, not even close. Though I have convinced a couple of my siblings that Genesis is allegory (small victories).

As I think back on my trip, I realize that I didn't really want evidence from the future to persuade my family – it was to assure myself that I had made the right choice. Unfortunately, the future can't help me with that either. I have to find those answers myself.

On a different note, grad school has been good, but a little boring. TLT is not nearly as much fun as Tech U.

I am going out on another date with Jessica tonight (Beth and I broke up over the summer). This will be our third date. Jessica's kind of cute, but I don't see this relationship going anywhere, but it's something to do.
Journal Entry: 02/12/2014

Well I couldn't have been more wrong about Jessica – I asked her to marry me last Saturday night and she said YES!!! I can't believe that I ever described Jessica as being kind of cute. She is the most beautiful, wonderful woman in the world.

I showed Jessica my journal today. I am not sure if she really believes that I have traveled in time, but she loves me enough to at least fake that she does. Did I mention how wonderful Jessica is?

If you are wondering if love has changed my perspective on God, let me assure you that it has not. I am still an atheist, and I am sure that I will be one for the rest of my life. Jessica, who is Lutheran, doesn't like me saying that, but we have agreed to disagree on this one.

On an ironic note Stan, my old college roommate – the same one who opened my eyes on religion – posted last week on his Facebook page that he has now joined the United Church of Christ. I thought he was joking, but he's serious. Stan told me that he found God when his Dad got really sick last year (apparently Stan and his entire family found God). By the way, Stan is a little touchy on this subject. I wouldn't recommend telling him that he is just deluding himself (he un-friended me on Facebook last week).

# Journal Entry: 03/22/2077

OK, there has been quite a gap since my last journal entry. Time has kind of gotten away from me – life has a way of doing that. My 97th birthday is a couple weeks away, and I intend this to be my final journal entry.

So, are you wondering if I am still an atheist?

Well, I can happily write that I am not, I'm Lutheran. To be more specific, I'm a Deacon at the First Lutheran Church of Bloomington (and no, there are no second or third Lutheran churches in Bloomington.) So, was it my trip to the future that started me down this road? The answer is no. Oh, it got me to think about it. But I can admit now that I was too stubborn and proud to be swayed by a 60 minute conversation, even if it was with my multi-millennial descendants. No it was Jessica, my wife and the mother of my eight children, who started me down the road.

After Jessica and I got engaged, I started going to church with her. I went just to spend time with her, and to make her happy. I wasn't converted right away, but about five years after we were married, Jessica convinced me to go on a couples' spiritual retreat. I don't know what it was about the retreat, but for the first time since I was like twelve, I felt the divine call. I felt It – as my multi-millennial grandsons would say. And that was the beginning.

When we got back from the retreat I started off on a familiar quest to discover the truth about God, myth or real. This time, unlike my trip to the future, I went in with an open mind. I re-read C.S Lewis and Francis Collins's books, plus a dozen others – some in favor of the divine and some not. Anyway, I eventually came to the conclusion that there must be a God.

My quest then switched to determining which religion was correct, or at least the most correct. In the end, I chose Christianity. I officially joined my wife's church, and twenty years later I became a Deacon, yes me, a Deacon. And I have even published a few religious books. The most popular of those was "Betting on God," which I will get to in a minute.

Now you may think that my path to God was unique, but besides my trip into the future, it's not. Saint Augustine, bishop of Hippo, left the Christian church in his teens because he deemed it filled with incredulous stories, only to return to the church and become arguably one of its most important theologians. C.S Lewis and Francis Collins were both atheists before their own quests led them to Christianity. There are countless other examples. As I said mine, minus the time travel, is not unique.

Anyway, even with the medical advances of the past decades, I feel the years weighing heavily on me. So, while my wits are still good, I wanted to record one more journal entry for my future descendants.

With there being such a gap between my last journal entry, I feel the need to provide a high level recap of what has been going on with Christianity over the last 70 years. And let me just say, it has been a remarkable time to be alive and to be part of it. As Phyllis Tickle wrote in her book, "The Great Emergence, How Christianity is changing and why?" Christianity goes through a major evolution/revolution every 500 years or so. The end of the 20th century and the beginning of the 21st century was one of those periods.

So, how has Christianity changed? Well, in short, we left the Theological Dark Ages behind and entered into a new age of theological enlightenment. Thanks to books by Francis Collins and several others, a dialogue emerged, and a literal interpretation of Genesis was eventually abandon by the majority of Christians, leading to a renewed emphasis on understanding God's universe through science. But that was only the tip of the iceberg.

Probably the most significant change has been a renewed emphasis on Jesus' last commandment to his disciples:

" _And now I give you a new commandment: love another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. If you have love for one another, then everyone will know that you are my disciples." John (13:34-35)_

Love, not judge, condemn, scold, shun, isolate, ex-communicate or avoid. Just love one another – it is such a simple, yet profound commandment. Christians are called to be beacons of Christ's light, His love, to the rest of the world, but that purpose had gotten lost over the ages. At the dawn of the 21st century, Christianity had become known more for what it was supposedly against (anti-science, anti-gay and etc.), than what it was for. Thankfully that has changed.

The movement that would ultimately change this perception was small at first, but gradually grew and grew. In fact, it really started as two separate movements that would eventually become one. The movements were commonly referred to as "Show Them" and "Shine for Them."

The "Show Them" movement, was basically just leading by example. By the end of the 20th century, society had grown cynical over the hypocrisy practiced by many of its political, social and religious leaders. Mankind was looking for people who led by example. For Christian's that meant not just going to church every week, or just believing that Jesus was the son of God. It meant being compassionate, charitable, forgiving, understanding and of course loving. Or to put it a different way, being Christ's light in the world.

So a movement started which challenged all Christians to ask themselves this question – were you a beacon of Christ's light today? Now this didn't mean standing on a street corner with a megaphone reciting verses from the Bible. It meant treating the people who you met in your everyday life, from strangers to your family and friends, with love, understanding and compassion. It is amazing how a simple question like that can have a tremendous impact on a person's outlook, and how they treat others. It eventually became a common chant for almost every denomination, from Catholicism to Baptist, from Mormons to Methodists. Were you a beacon of God's love today?

The other movement, "Shine for Them," began in some of the non-denominational Christian churches, and eventually spread to the mainstream ones as well. The movement was a shift in tactics from spreading the good news to individuals, and getting them "Saved", to focusing on how to "Save" one's communities. Sure, reaching one person at a time had been the standard approach for spreading Christ's message of love and hope since the beginning of Christianity, and that was still very important. However, at the beginning of the 21st century, Christianity has been the world's largest religion for over 1,000 years. Its message, especially in the industrial nations, had become so well known that it was starting to lose its ability to attract people to it. And the Churches many contributions to society were often overlooked. For example, churches in America were doing more to house and feed the homeless than the Federal, State and Local governments combined. And that was, and is an important ministry, but unless you were homeless or went to a PADS participating church, you probably weren't even aware of it.

So this new movement, "Shine for Them," focused on new ministries that were aimed at improving and enriching the community. These ministries ranged from civic improvement projects, to sponsoring city festivals. Regardless of the activity, whether it was a food drive or a concert in the park, the program was aimed outside the four walls of the church, and all were invited, all were welcome.

In most cases, several churches in a community would work together with the local governments and schools. The goal of these programs was simple, improve/enrich the community, and be a shining example of God's love. It was a no-strings-attached approach, with the simple hope that if you get people to show up, then some of them may feel the call, the _It_ , and want more. And if not, worse case, you are still making your community a better place to live.

The impact of these programs was amazing. Churches were re-energized, attendance went through the roof, but more importantly communities were made better – cleaner, safer, more open, and more loving. Like I said, it was amazing. At the same time it really wasn't surprising. Making the world a better place, or as some call it – _Making Heaven on Earth_ , is really what we are called to do. God gave us all the tools to do it, we just need to act.

I am happy to say that I, and my whole family, were active participants in these programs, and as much as we gave, we have received tenfold in return. However, what I am semi-famous for is my book, "Betting on God."

Now when the Professor told me they couldn't go into a lot of details about the whole "Heaven and Hell" question, I would have never guessed that was because I was destined to write a book on the subject. Me, not only a Deacon, but a Christian author.

Anyway, I was inspired to write this book after I read Rob Bell's book, "Love Wins: A Book about Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived. **"** Which is a really thought provoking book, that I highly recommend reading. Now, when I say I was inspired to write my book after reading Rob Bell's book, that isn't really accurate. I should say that I was inspired to write my book after I read a number of Christian groups criticizing Rob's book, which were pretty much accusing him of heresy.

Now do I agree with everything that Rob wrote in his book? No, but I do agree with him that God is everywhere, He has a plan for everyone, and that God wants to save everyone. And I mean everyone, Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Agnostics, Atheists, Cub fans – everyone.

Now some would say that God just can't save us, we have to want to be saved – God has given everyone that right, that choice. And to that I say yes, you are undoubtedly correct. But God is not a finite being like we are. He is infinite, with unlimited time and ways to achieve His goals. He is everywhere and His silent call is going out to everyone.

So for those people out there who believe that the nice Jewish, Muslim, Hindu, Agnostic or Atheist family in their neighborhood, who are outgoing, loving and doing everything that Jesus wants them to do, aren't going to Heaven because they haven't formally recognized Christ as their savior. Well, you could be right, I don't know – no one does. But me personally, I think they will, because just like in the parable of the Good Samaritan, those loving, caring, forgiving, charitable non-Christians in the world are doing God's will. They are listening to Christ's silent call to make the world a better place. Or to put it a different way, even though they don't know it, they have Christ in their hearts. And just like the priest and Levite in the parable, there are many people who call themselves Christians who do not. So, who do you think God will welcome into his Kingdom? The people who profess to believe, but don't do His will, or the people who profess to believe something else, but do?

For me, I believe with every fiber of my being that it is not what you say, but what you do that's important. And I believe that God wants everyone to be with Him, has a plan for everyone to be saved, and will not give up on anyone easily. And will He really do it? Will God save everyone? I don't know. People still have free will, so maybe some will choose not to receive God's grace. But if I had to wager on it, well – I'm betting on God!

And that is a quick synopsis of my book, and quick recap of what I, and Christianity, have been up to over the last seventy years. Like I said, it has been an amazing time to be alive.

So, as I stated earlier, I intend this to be my final journal entry. I have made the necessary arrangements to have this journal included with my will/request to my descendants. However, I have addressed it specifically to Professor Albert Phineas III and my 70th Grandsons Aaron and Jacob.

Gentlemen, I never got the chance to thank you for granting my request. I consider myself very fortunate to have gotten to meet you. May your lives be filled with wonder and joy, as mine has been. And thank you again, for my wonderful trip in time.

### The End

# A Note from the Author

Hello, I hoped you have enjoyed reading My Trip in Time. There are a few people who I would like to thank, but before I do that, I wanted to provide some additional commentary on this story.

First, let me say that I am not a religious historian, theologian, priest or minister. I am an author, or better yet, a storyteller. I set out to tell an interesting story, and mix in some theological topics that I have struggled/wrestled with over the years. While I am not a religious historian, theologian, priest or minister; I did perform extensive research on the theological and historical topics that are covered in this story. So I am confident that you will find that the historical topics covered in this book are accurate, and while some of the theological ideas discussed in this story are not universally agreed upon, they are definitely not new.

Second, I did not write this story to try to persuade atheists or agnostics to become Christian (if that happens, that's wonderful, but that was not why I wrote this story). Instead I wrote this story for all those people out there who, like me, grew up believing that Genesis was supposed to be a literal account of creation, and that scientific theories, like the Big Bang and Evolution, were anti-creation, anti-God. As you have read in this story, they are not.

If you are interested in performing your own research on this topic, the following are some of the books that I read/listen to as a part of my research:

  * From Jesus to Constantine, Great Lecture Series, by Professor Bart D. Ehrman

  * Science and Religion, Great Lecture series, by Professor Lawrence M. Principe

  * The quest: the historians' search for Jesus and Muhammad by Professor F.E. Peters

  * The language of God: a scientist presents evidence for belief by Francis S. Collins

  * Love wins, a book about heaven, hell and the fate of every person who ever lived by Rob Bell

  * Mere Christianity by C. S. Lewis

  * The great emergence : how Christianity is changing and why by Phyllis Tickle

  * The Case for God by Karen Armstrong

  * Rediscovering Catholicism by Matthew Kelly

And finally, I would like to thank the following people:

  * My wife and kids, for all your love and support

  * Guy, Janice and Troy, for reading drafts of this story and giving me some valuable feedback

  * For all my nieces (plus my kids) for supplying the names of many of the characters in this book

  * And finally my parents, for all the love and support you have given me over the years

If you would like to get updates on my next projects, you can visit me on Facebook or check out my blog: http://tgaler.blogspot.com.

Thank you,

T. Galer

p.s. Speaking of my next projects...the first two books on my Redemption Saga are available on Amazon. The Redemption Saga is a modern day fantasy series and the following is its back cover teaser for book 1, the Calling:

Kimberly Jenkins, a twenty something Marketing Analysts with the Pinnacle Financial Group, has no aspirations for a life of adventure. All she wants to do is climb the corporate ladder, and maybe get married someday and start a family. All seems to be going well for her modest dreams until three consultants, who no one besides herself can seem to remember, start sitting in her row at work, and always seem to be around wherever she goes. Who are these strange consultants? And why does she have this feeling that something awful is about to happen?

Come and follow Kimberly's journey from the normal world that most people believe exists, to the real world that contains monsters, demons, and a group of people whose job it is to protect mankind from such horrors.

 Show more

 Show less

Redemption Part 1 – The Calling:

 http://www.amazon.com/Redemption-Part-Calling-Chronicles-ebook/dp/B00AGABU1C/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1366169984&sr=8-1&keywords=t+galer

Redemption Part 2 – The Lost:

 http://www.amazon.com/Redemption-Order-Light-Chronicles-ebook/dp/B00ARX1ETQ/ref=sr_sp-atf_title_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1366169984&sr=8-2&keywords=t+galer

MY TRIP IN TIME

First Edition (1.0.0)

A TLT Book

Copyright © 2011 by Todd Galer

All rights reserved.

*******

All scripture quotations in this publication are from the Good News Translation in Today's English Version- Second Edition Copyright © 1992 by American Bible Society. Used by Permission.

