Quote:
|
Detector, can you tell me what science can actually 'test' in the Bible?
|
Take the story of Mosses leading the Israelites to the promise land. As has already been pointed out possible mistranslation from the original bible needs clarifying. It is now believed it was not the Red Sea but the Sea of Reeds. A much smaller sea making the event less spectacular and more plausible.
Just as science was used on the story of Custer's last stand, science could also examine, test(repeatable) and verify the event. Such a large group would surely leave evidence behind such as pottery shards. By testing and dating the relics they could determine if such an event occurred, when it occurred, who was there and the path taken.
As far as the missing link I am aware of the new information linking Neanderthal. Seems rather convenient to me that not long ago science determined and made the claim that Neanderthal was not related to man(homoerectes{sp}) but a different species that died out. Now new information makes that information false.
The idea the Neanderthal was not an ancestor of man was not a theory but supposedly fact. Now its oops we were wrong, here is the real facts. Science self-correcting? Is that just a more acceptable way of saying we were wrong?
In any case a missing link has yet to be found. Proof that Neanderthal may have mutated to modern man is far from proof that plants mutated to animals.