This post has been merged into Darwin’s Dyke, posts that explore the weaknesses of Darwinism.
Presumption is powerful.
Immanuel Kant reasoned that an Infinite Being could only be reflected in nothing less than an infinite universe. -1- His reasoning was presumptuous. Nowhere in the Scriptures was such a requirement given. Nonetheless, his hypothesis became well-received until it became recognized as a theory. This idea of an eternal, infinite universe became the basis of Darwinism, the steady state model and a host of other cosmological heresies requiring billions and billions of years.
I like how Hugh Ross put it: “By the end of the nineteenth century [Kant’s cosmological model] was cast in concrete. The concrete began to crack, however, almost before it dried.” -2-
Of course, the Big Bang gave us a beginning to the universe and an end to the idea of limitless time in which evolution, or anything else needing such a time-scale to overcome probabilities for that matter, could take place.
Looking back to Kant, it’s amazing that more theologians did not object to his model. You see, if God created an infinite universe, He could not exist outside of it. That being the case, He would be bound by it, by time, by its laws. Miracles would be impossibility and, I daresay, so would answered prayer.
On another note, since Darwin’s theory was based in a large part on a universe of limitless time in which natural selection could work its magic, it’s no small wonder that his theory is showing considerable stress as its proponents attempt to shore up its weaknesses. In the end, I believe, it will be shown to be just another theory cast in concrete only to crack and crumble away.
Read more about Darwin’s Dyke, posts that explore the weaknesses of Darwinism!
-1- Immanuel Kant, “Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens,” Theories of the Universe, ed. Milton K Munitz (Glencoe, IL: Free Press, 1957), page 240.
-2- Hugh Ross, The Creator and the Cosmos (Colorado Springs, CO: Navpress, 1993), pg. 45