The obvious answer to that question is ‘yes’. Anyone can be wrong. We all make mistakes, we all reach flawed conclusions, it’s part of being human to err. However that doesn’t mean we throw the baby out with the bathwater.
That is the desire of TEWSNBN, who has written not one but two posts entitled ‘Can All Those Scientists be Wrong?’ In the first of his posts, TEWSNBN states:
The best guide we can give you is that if it disagrees with the Bible, then it is wrong. God is never wrong and scientists do not know more than he does. This leads us into the answer to the topic question above.
Can all those scientists be wrong? Of course, they can. What the unbelieving world does not accept is that there is an ultimate right, and ultimate wrong and that truth never changes.
They also do not accept the fact that as unbelievers, they are deceived and blinded by evil. It does not matter how many scientists you stack up on one side of the argument against the Bible, the Bible is never wrong.
The scientists will always be wrong, including those Christian ones who say that the Bible is in error or made errors. It also does not matter how many degrees they have collectively behind their names or collective years ‘doing science.
Those scientists who do not accept the Bible are the ones in error and yes, they can all be wrong. Finding the truth is not a popularity contest nor is it decided by a rule of the majority. The truth is the truth no matter how many or how few people accept it.
Lots of things disagree with the Bible. The Quran disagrees with the Bible. The Torah disagrees with the Bible. The Vedas disagree with the Bible. Each claims to be the objective truth. However there is a way to reach an objective truth that does not come from a religious text – it’s called the scientific method, and if it is so bad at guiding us to the truth, how come science gets so many things right?
If scientists are wrong, how do we have certain and obvious truths? The flow of electricity and the experiments to harness it have transformed our lives. Our development of chemistry and biology has helped save lives. Through physics we revealed untold wonders that have helped us. These are facts, or ‘objective truths’.
There’s more, for there is plenty we can observe. We now have the means to see the universe in more detail than ever before. We are learning, all the time, about the nature of the world around us. This information often has tangible benefits. It has impacted the development of mobile phones and other technologies. Utilising the scientific method and general human curiosity led to the discovery of microbes and that in turn led to a better understanding of how to fight diseases. These are facts, objective details about our world.
From TEWSNBN’s second post:
As we mentioned yesterday, there were other points in the following article that need to be addressed-Tim Gilleand Asks: How Can All Those Scientists be Wrong?
Most unbelievers make science out to be some utopia research field where everyone gets along. That picture is far from the truth as science is filled with liars, people who fudge fats and results, people who discriminate, and on it goes.
It is also a research field that is not as objective as it claims. True objectivity would accept and look at all possibilities but science does not do that. it excludes other possibilities for its results because it is not an objective research field.
Science is a very biased one that tries very hard to get the results to prove their accepted theories. Forget the claim that it is self-correcting. It isn’t and that is an article topic for another day.
I don’t know of anyone who pretends science is a field where everyone gets along, but to claim it is filled with liars is in itself a lie. Science is about testing theories and testing the conclusions from those theories, and developing new theories from those conclusions that get tested. Inevitably some tests will lead to incorrect conclusions, so new tests take place as more information comes to light. Experiments are not performed with the intent of reaching a specific, pre-determined or desired answer, but merely to find answers. Those answers are then tested. Science vigorously tests itself, over and over again.
Yet for some reason, this is not (in TEWSNBN’s mind) objective. Apparently science lacks true objectivity because it doesn’t look at all possibilities, but what does it exclude? The supernatural (something which by definition cannot be studied and falls outside of science)? Religious texts (of which there are many, and many of which contradict one another)? Again, religious texts fall outside of science, which is about observation and experimentation.
2
0
20
“That picture is far from the truth as science is filled with liars, people who fudge fats and results, people who discriminate, and on it goes.”
Having been surrounded by Christians and church-culture for years and years, I can say this can be a good descriptor for church-people, too. I once heard that one businessman in my town made a point of never ever doing business with any pastors. Because in his experience, they’re the biggest crooks. Anecdotal observation? Sure. So is the original comment.
“The Vedas disagree with the Bible.”
Indeed, there is a special layer of Naraka (the Hindu non-eternal Hell) reserved for Veda-deniers. They would be forced to run through a forest where the leaves are as sharp as a knife’s blade. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naraka_(Hinduism)
The concept of Naraka seems quite unique – I confess to being largely ignorant of Hinduism, but it appears Naraka offers people a chance at redemption, unlike the eternal torment a supposedly loving and forgiving God condemns people to in Christianity and other religions. That said, the notion that any version of this omnipotent deity, with all their apparent love and wisdom and compassion, would need the need to torture people for not worshipping them in exactly the right way, is… unappealing.