Finite or Infinite?
It will have been noticed by other Creationists, I am sure, that the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) position about the expanse of the universe is that it is infinite. Two quotations from Dr. Henry Morris will suffice to establish this position: a) "...the universe is boundless, and it is not even possible to define the center of infinite space. Therefore, we have to always use the concept of relative motion when we talk about motions of the heavenly bodies...."("ICR’s OFFICIAL, UNOFFICIAL POSITION ON GEOCENTRICITY", From: Biblical Astronomer, #93, Summer 2000); b) "Again and again God reminds us that ‘all the earth is mine’ (Exodus 19:5) and [Morris adds this to the Scripture:] "even the infinite heavens belong to Him." (Days of Praise, 7/2/00 entry).
The rationale given is that God is Infinite, ergo, the universe is infinite.
In addition to all that is involved in their Scriptureless stonewalling of science-supported Bible geocentrism and their muted, but nonetheless overt support of Bible-bashing heliocentricity, the ICR rationale about the universe being infinite because God is Infinite falls flat both logically and Scripturally. Note:
1) Logically, our Infinite God could create a finite universe or He would not be Infinite. Period and paragraph. End of argument.
2) As for Scriptural support for an infinite universe, the situation is the same as with Scriptural support for Copernicanism; that is to say, none exists.... The finite nature of the universe, on the other hand, is assured many places in Scripture. One of the most obvious examples is found in Isaiah 66:22 where God promises both New heavens and a New earth and declares the promise fulfilled in Rev. 20:11 & 21:1. The old heavens and earth are obviously finite entities that can both be done away with and replaced so that the new heavens and new earth entities can assume their eternal role. (More on this at: "The Bible Teaches a "New", not A "Re-newed" Earth.")
All Scriptures that teach a New Earth and New Heavens also teach a finite universe. The first Heavens and Earth constitute a universal entity that was created, that has a history, and is destroyed, never to be seen again. That creation was (and temporarily remains) a finite creation.
From a purely Creationist standpoint, the embrace and promotion of an infinite universe concept plays directly into the hands of those who are poised to finish off the Creationist opposition to evolutionism! Here is how this works:
A) An infinite, boundless space concept opens wide the door for evolution-indoctrinated cosmologists to postulate and publicize anything they can come up with about the existence of galaxies and planets and life forms in deep space. Who can effectively combat these claims??
The battlefield over the evolution question has shifted dramatically in the last two or three decades. Evolutionists don’t bother debating Creationist scientists (and loosing) over earthly evolution much anymore. However, the avalanche of Star Trekian TV and movie themes and books involving extraterrestrials, and all the Saganesque assurances that the universe has got to be swarming with life forms in various stages of evolution, is the new battlefield, in case anyone hasn’t figured that out. NASA’s "Origins Program" embodies today’s strategy for clearing the battlefield of Creationists once and for all.
How can the Creationist leadership do anything but help the evolutionist’s "Origins Program" when--by their own embrace of the infinite universe concept-- they actually grant the Saganites everything they need space-wise and time-wise to give their probability statistics an air of reasonableness? Recent reports, for example, of the discovery of another galaxy ten Billion light years away and the discovery of a planet thirteen Billion light years away (give us a break, please!) can get no meaningful rebuttal from infinite universe advocates at ICR. Dr. Henry Morris wrote recently: "Astronomers estimate that at least ten trillion trillion stars exist in the heavens...." (Days of Praise, 7/22/00). Comparably goofy claims by earth-bound evolutionary scientists would be dismissed out of hand by Dr. Morris, and rightly so. But cosmologists can claim anything "out there" and it doesn’t seem to faze him. (Besides, it seems scripturally relevant to note Psalm 147:4: "HE counts the number of the stars; HE calls them all by their names." Is that number "at least ten trillion trillion"? Has God given "at least ten trillion trillion" individual names to the stars which HE has declared repeatedly will be destroyed and replaced with New Heavens? Or is this just cosmological /evolutionary style hyperbole at the end of a huge list of contra-scientific assumptions?? "Come now, and let us reason together..." Isaiah [1:18] speaks of a God who is reasonable....)
Aside from the incomprehensibly great level of credulity Dr. Morris and other Creationists are willing to extend to space scientists hypothesizing all over the place about things they have not seen and about which they have no real data, the danger of this attitude from the Creationist standpoint is this: Such credulity aids and abets the 15 billion years presently upholding the Big Bang paradigm which includes a 4.6 billion year old earth, an age which is totally anathema to the Creationist young-earth position!
In plain words, ICR (and AIG) have battled commendably against all claims of earth-bound evolution, but are somewhere between ineffective and counterproductive in the real and final battle over Creationism vs. Evolutionism which is being settled in the Space Program. One more time: ICR and other Creationists impressively battle evolutionist claims of millions and billions of years of macro-evolutionism on earth on the one hand; then with the other hand they grant an infinitely large universe to evolutionary cosmologists who declare that it took those millions and billions of years to get a universe this big and that a 4.6 billion year old earth is a space "fact" that is on the books and not about to be changed.
Does Dr. Morris or anyone else really believe that embracing the illogical and contra-Scriptural infinity position does not serve the evolutionist cause by supplying the one ingredient evolutionists must have to establish extraterrestrial evolution (and cinch earthly evolution)?? That one indispensable ingredient is TIME, and both the basically unintelligible "infinite universe" concept and the equally unintelligible Big Bang concept with its 15 billion years of Expanding Universe provide that indispensable ingredient. The bottom line here is that belief in an infinite universe actually encourages belief in the Big Bang paradigm (which ICR rejects!) and thus allows the 4.6 billion year old earth that home-grown evolutionism thrives on....
B) ICR’s belief in an Infinite Universe also precludes any possibility of accepting a stationary earth with the sun going around, no matter how insistent the Scriptures are on the subject [See: Sixty-seven References, Gram-Semant]. After all, not only the sun, but the stars also must orbit the earth in the Scriptural non-moving-earth system. Clearly, if Dr. Morris et al accept the cosmologist’s exotic claims of billions of light year distances to stars from earth, the compelling conclusion is that even God couldn’t get those stars around the earth every day; hence the geocentrism model couldn’t be right and Creationists must make those scores of non moving earth Scriptures say the opposite of what they say....
Consequently, what ICR and other Creationists who follow Dr. Henry Morris' insistence on an infinite universe need to realize is:
a) The Biblical Model of the Universe is not only inescapably finite, it is no more than one half of one light day thick, and has a built-in design mechanism that is scientifically unimpeachable. The seven part series which provides confirmation for those conclusions begins and is entitled: "The Size and Structure of the Universe According to the Bible and Non-Theoretical Science." [See: Size-Structure Pt 1]
b) The 15 billion year old and 15 billion light years thick universe of today's cosmology is actually promoted by Creationist adherence to a universe of "infinite" size. It is time that Creationists realize that the ruling cosmological "creation scenario", i.e., The Big Bang Paradigm, is not a secular concept, but is demonstrably the fulfillment of a "creation scenario" derived from anti-Bible, anti-Christ Kabbalist Rabbinical writings which go back at least to the 1st century and are plainly spelled out by contemporary Kabbalists. Confirmation for these conclusions can be found in another seven part series entitled "Kabbala”.
c) The continuance of the entire masquerade--namely, Kabbalist/Talmudic Phariseeism disguised at "Theoretical Science"--is completely and unalterably dependent upon a "fail-safe" prevention of any exposure of the Copernican Model of a rotating, orbiting Earth as being a clever lie. As can be seen throughout the "Size and Structure..." links and elsewhere [See: Assumptions], all of modern Kabbalistic Kosmology crumbles when Copernican Heliocentricity is exposed as a contra-scientific myth.
d) The message for genuine Creationists and all Truth lovers will soon become strikingly--and even painfully-- clear, namely: The continuing triumph of the evolutionary mind-set that now underpins virtually all of modern man’s”knowledge" [See: Knowledge Impact] depends on the maintenance of an anti-Biblical "creation scenario" which is in turn dependent upon maintaining the Copernican Model of a moving Earth, denied in the Bible and all observation and experiments, but supported by the Creationist organizations.
e) The bottom line: Creationists who support an infinite universe and a rotating, orbiting earth are not only providing the needed rationale for the Bible-destroying Big Bang-Expanding Universe Paradigm, but are also blocking a Creationist attack on Copernican Heliocentricity which is the Achilles Heel of the whole Kabbalist "creation scenario" which has established extraterrestrial and terrestrial evolutionism and all but destroyed Bible credibility from its first page to its last page.
When Creationists and all other people learn how heliocentricity triumphed without the first piece of indisputable proof, they will simultaneously learn something vastly more important; indeed, they will realize in an unshakable way: a) That--since the Copernican Revolution--there has been a steady acceleration in a movement to dethrone the God of the Bible as the author of Truth and Goodness and replace Him with "science falsely so-called", and: b) That--in these last 4 1/2 centuries particularly--this replacement of God and the Bible as the final source of Truth by hypothetical science has been accomplished primarily through abstract math gone wild and capable of "proving" anything, and: c) By caving in on Bible inerrancy where geocentrism is concerned, the Christian Church opened the door for the Devil to establish the evolution myth as "science"...and then to spin off that lie with other Bible-bashing isms (Marxism, Freudianism, Einsteinism, Saganism), to the end that man’s "knowledge" which runs today’s world is pure "foolishness" to God [See: Knowledge Impact].
The senior Dr. Morris’ belief in an infinite universe and his awe-struck belief in the claims of mostly secular scientists and physicists is, I must admit, a bit of a mystery to me. One would think that a man of such proven ability and energy and love of the Word of God, and such a long time witness of the exaggerations and outright prevarications of evolutionary scientists, would be the most wary and suspicious of men when it comes to accepting the ever fluid and ephemeral hypotheses of secular scientists and their almost daily "discoveries" of "life signs" beyond earth somewhere. Surely he must recognize that these scientists have the same degree of vested interests in promoting their extraterrestrial "discoveries" as evolutionary scientists have in promoting their terrestrial ones. Surely he must realize that these cosmologists serve up thick slices of pseudo-scientific baloney with the same regularity and excited hype as the evolutionary mythologists hawk their nonsense. Both groups have their theories stamped on both sides: "Real Science! Don’t Challenge!" Surely he realizes the deep and abiding loathing of Scriptural evidence that dominates the thinking of evolutionary scientists, so why act as if the secular cosmologists who are evolutionists are any different? Why disbelieve one cadre of evolutionists and believe the other? Why challenge everything one stands for, and agree with the basics (boundless universe, and relativity with no possible earthly inertia) that the other stands for... ESPECIALLY when both are flatly repudiated in Scripture and just as flatly advocated in anti-Bible, anti-Christ mystic Kabbalism?!
There is no difference in the approach of these two cadres of pseudo-scientists (terrestrial and extra-terrestrial evolutionists) when it comes to dumbing down the world’s populations. They just keep saying something and presenting it over and over and over thru every media outlet...until people quit questioning what they are saying, having become fearful that they will look like idiots if they do. Creationists know that evolutionism is a gargantuan lie that could be destroyed in a 5-10 hour TV series. They know that the reason the lie keeps growing is because it is presented everywhere with ever increasing boldness as something "scientific"...a scientific fact. "Hand’s off you Bible-thump’n nitwits!" evolutionists can be heard to mutter through clinched teeth when challenged. And if this is the case with terrestrial evolutionism--which still has a trained and vocal host of people against it (thanks in great part to Dr. Morris at ICR and other Creationists!)--then it is easy to see how horrified the "science" establishment becomes at the mere mention of opening up the long-settled heliocentricity model to investigation and testing. "Oh my! It’s just too abthurd to even conthider! I mean, we are thimply aghast!" Or: "It’s a fact, stupid! Don’t even think about challenging it!"
Beyond any doubt--if Scripture be one's sole guide...as it must be for Bible Creationists!--the present heavens were finite when created and are finite when it can be said that they--along with the earth--will have "...fled away; and there was found no place for them" (Rev. 20:11) and "will not even be remembered or come to mind..." (Isaiah 65:17).
And just as scripturally certain, the promised separate creation of New Heavens and a New Earth (Isaiah 65:17; 66:22) is speaking of two finite entities. Notice: "And I [John] saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away..." (Rev.21:1). John didn’t say that the heavens and the earth we now have would be ‘re-newed" or burnt off and re-upholstered. He said that they are finite entities that will pass away when a New Earth in a New Heavens will "come down" right in the spot from whence the old earth has "fled away". Peter wrote that not only the earth but the heavens as well would "melt...be burned up...be dissolved" (Gr. "utterly consumed") and that Christians should look for the promised New Earth, didn’t he (II Pet.3:10-13)? You can’t get much plainer than that! (And the counter arguments have no Scriptural weight at all, as a trip to this link [See: New-Renew] will confirm.)
If, then, Scripture plainly declares that this universe with its created heavens and earth will flee away and be replaced by another earth and other heavens, it is equally plain that the present universe is finite and not infinite.
As far as I can tell from thirty years of listening, many (perhaps most) creationists would not go along with the infinite universe concept if they understood how it aids and abets the destruction of the Bible's Creation Account and its replacement with today's Kabbalist Big Bang Paradigm disguised as "Science". In fact, the concept of "infinity" itself is known to be one of the most recalcitrant problems of natural philosophy. It would seem that few natural scientists, Creationists or not, would want to lean on something so philosophically mushy and make it the backbone of their concept of the universe. The concept is not Scriptural; it is not logical; it is not scientifically sustainable; it is even philosophically squishy. So why, as a Bible Creationist, embrace it? Does it help in fighting evolutionism, ICR’s reason to exist?? If so, how? Or, does it contribute to a blindness that hobbles Creationists in that fight, and actually--if left unchallenged--does it assure further and further retreat and ultimate defeat??
Anyway, with Mr. Infinite Universe ignominiously limping off the field, we can turn our attention to the Biblical teaching of New Heavens and a New Earth. Obviously, this is a teaching of the keenest relevancy to our part of this finite "universe"...so that one topic fuses with the other quite naturally.
Does the Bible teach that "New" really means "Re-new"--as not only ICR, but practically all Baptists, Pentecostals, Jehovah Witnesses, and some others teach--or does it actually mean "New" as in NEW? And if "New" means "New"--as we have already begun to see that it does--how does that fact prevent all those steeped in the "Re-new" doctrine from seeing what the Devil has cooked up for the world and has cleverly hidden under the normal work and aspirations of the heliocentricity-dependent "Space Program"?!
GO TO: A NEW OR RE-NEWED EARTH?
GO BACK TO: GENESIS I: 1-5