Certainly, life is precious and short.

I recently read an estimate that an average person living in a developed country has approximately 30,000 days to "experience [his] existence." The estimate was followed by the assertion that 30,000 days is all the time a person can "rationally" expect to have. Any expectation of any existence before or after this 30,000 days was labeled impossible to prove and therefore irrational. The emphasis was on "rational thinking" which the writer embraced as descriptive of his beliefs while hotly rejecting the term "atheist" as pejorative. The writing leads me to begin wondering.

If you only had 30,000 days to “experience your existence,” and then that was it, no more, none. You knew this, rationally, to be a fact; then it seems to me it would be rational to conclude that you would make all life decisions with this fact foremost in your mind. I am not quite sure exactly what those life decisions would be, nor that it is rational to conclude everyone would make the same decisions (the history of rationalism does not support that expectation), but certainly for many this 30,000 day limit would influence their decisions.

I can’t help but wonder though, whether those life decisions would change if there was a possibility, a mere possibility, that you might have an infinite amount of time, a quantity of time that makes 30,000 days shrink into insignificance; an eternity, let us say, to “experience your existence.” Certainly, the history of man’s past rational conclusions leads us to consider the possibility that at this time, we may not have all the facts concerning our existence. There may be existences beyond our 30,000 days we yet know nothing about. I think a rational person, for considering all possible contingencies is certainly rational, might modify his initial decisions when considering this possibility.

Another thought occurs. What if the life decisions you make during your 30,000 days determine the quality of your eternal experience? That is a belief held by many, in a variety of faiths, both in the present and throughout all recorded history. Certainly, it is not rational to conclude that even the most massive of mass delusions could influence that many people through history to such similar conclusions. It seems more rational to consider the possibility, even the merest possibility, that how you choose to live during your 30,000 days determines the quality of your experience for all eternity. Would the possibility of an eternity determined by your 30,000-day existence make it seem even shorter and even more precious? Possibly precious is too weak a word. Would not the life choices you make become crucial?

What if you came to believe—for belief may be what would be required, because the “rational” arguments against this are persuasive—what if you came to believe this eternity was a certainty and not just a possibility? How would your choices change then? How important would those choices become? Are we forced, rationally, to consider this possibility also?

I am beginning to sweat just a bit. Who needs this kind of pressure? I am beginning to wish rationalism had a better record of accomplishment. The history of rational man is full of rational certainties reversed when more data was discovered. With that track record, it seems rational to make life decisions considering the possibility that what looks like irrational belief now will become rational truth when we have more data. However, as we continue to give weight to more and more "beliefs" in the name of rationalism the clarity and certainty of rationalism seems to blur more and more. There is comfort in the certainty that given all significant data, rational men will inevitably get the answers right, but that is cold comfort for me. History is long, but I only have 30,000 days.

Furthermore, a great many believe the whole point of the 30,000 days you have, the reason you have them, is to prepare you for, and give you an opportunity to, experience the best eternity possible, and—here’s the kicker—the quality of that eternity, they believe, is determined by the decisions you make, the things you choose to believe during your 30,000 days. Is it not the most rational path to consider this possibility also? How odd that rationalism so forcefully pushes us to embrace irrationalism.

That is it! That is enough! Too much to consider! Do I have to get all this right? What happens if I mess up, have a weak moment, get a little tired, distracted, or just do not make the best, most rational decision about something? Have I blown the whole thing? My 30,000 days are diminished by these lapses in rationality; they may be destroyed by just plain wrong conclusions—of course only because I didn’t have all the facts—and finally there is still the merest possibility my eternity may also be screwed up by my bad choices.

It seems to me rationality collapses because it is rigid, unforgiving, and ultimately, cannot carry its own weight. The most rational thing for me to do is to make what rationalists may consider the very irrational decision to believe in a loving, forgiving God—even when I cannot always see his love in what he does or does not do. It seems best for me to give God my faith and service during my 30,000 days and trust to his love for the quality of existence I experience for eternity.

Certainly, life is precious and short, but is it all we have? I believe not. I think it is rational to believe there is more.