Origins: Adam & Eve Genetics
Summary
TLDRIn this episode of 'Origins', host Ray Heiple discusses the validity of Adam and Eve's existence through the lens of genetics with Dr. Georgia Purdham. They challenge the notion that genetics disproves a first human couple specially created by God. The conversation delves into the differences between human and chimp DNA, mitochondrial DNA analysis, and the implications for Christianity. The program asserts that observational science supports the biblical account of a recent creation of Adam and Eve, contrary to the evolutionary timeline, emphasizing the importance of the biblical narrative for the Christian faith and the Gospel message.
Takeaways
- 😔 The debate over the historical reality of Adam and Eve is ongoing, with some Christian theologians and scientists suggesting that genetics disproves their existence as a specially created couple by God.
- 🔬 Dr. Georgia Purdham, a molecular geneticist, argues that observational science, including DNA comparisons, supports the biblical account of Adam and Eve, contrary to the belief that genetics has disproven their existence.
- 📚 The script discusses the importance of interpretation in understanding the Bible and the role of worldview in interpreting evidence, with the implication that a belief in millions of years of evolution leads some to discard the historicity of Adam and Eve.
- 🧬 The script challenges the idea that humans and chimps share a common ancestor, pointing out that selective counting of DNA differences by evolutionists does not account for the full extent of genetic differences between the two species.
- 🧬📊 Dr. Purdham emphasizes that when all types of genetic differences are considered, the similarity between human and chimp DNA is significantly less than commonly claimed, suggesting a figure closer to 85% similarity rather than 98-99%.
- 👥 The concept of 'Mitochondrial Eve' is presented as being inconsistent with the biblical account of a single Eve created by God, with the script suggesting that mitochondrial DNA evidence supports a recent origin for humanity, aligning with a 6,000-year timescale.
- 🧬👵 The script discusses the mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA and how the observed number of differences in the human population supports a young 'Mitochondrial Eve', contradicting the evolutionary timeline of hundreds of thousands of years.
- 🤔 The script highlights the inconsistency in the dating of 'Mitochondrial Eve' by evolutionists, pointing out the fluctuation in estimates and the methodological issues arising from assuming human-chimp common ancestry.
- 🙏 The importance of Adam and Eve's historicity for Christian theology is underscored, with the argument that without a historical fall, the need for salvation and a savior is undermined.
- 🌳 The script contrasts the biblical 'very good' creation with the evolutionary narrative of death, disease, and suffering being a natural part of life, suggesting that the latter is inconsistent with a benevolent Creator.
- 📖 The script concludes by emphasizing the importance of the Bible as a foundation for truth and the implications of accepting or rejecting its account of creation and the historical Adam and Eve.
Q & A
What is the main debate discussed in the video script regarding Adam and Eve?
-The main debate discussed in the video script is whether Adam and Eve were real people or if they were a symbolic representation, and whether genetics has disproven their existence as a specially created couple by God.
What does Dr. Georgia Purdham's educational background include?
-Dr. Georgia Purdham has a PhD in molecular genetics from the Ohio State University, has won various honors, and has been a professor of biology.
What are the implications of the belief in millions of years and evolution for the concept of Adam and Eve according to the script?
-The belief in millions of years and evolution leads some Christians to discard the idea of Adam and Eve as real people because it doesn't fit within an evolutionary framework, suggesting that humans evolved from ape-like creatures.
What does the script suggest about the views of some Christians who are scientists and believe in evolution?
-The script suggests that some Christian scientists who believe in evolution view the biblical accounts of Adam and Eve being created from dust and a rib as non-literal, stating that such processes are not possible for creating human beings.
How does the script address the genetic similarities between humans and chimpanzees?
-The script discusses that while there are similarities, the claims of extremely high levels of similarity (98-99%) are misleading because they only consider certain types of genetic differences and ignore others that do not fit the evolutionary narrative.
What is the significance of mitochondrial DNA in the discussion of human ancestry?
-Mitochondrial DNA is significant because it is inherited only from the mother and can be used to trace maternal lineages. The script suggests that the analysis of mitochondrial DNA supports the biblical account of a single female ancestor, rather than the evolutionary idea of multiple ancestors.
What does the script argue about the consistency of the genetic evidence with the biblical account of creation?
-The script argues that the genetic evidence, particularly the analysis of mitochondrial DNA, is consistent with the biblical account of a single couple, Adam and Eve, being created around 6,000 years ago, rather than the evolutionary timeline of hundreds of thousands of years.
What is the 'mitochondrial Eve' according to the script?
-The 'mitochondrial Eve' is described as a woman from whom all living humans are believed to have inherited their mitochondrial DNA, according to evolutionary theory. However, the script argues that this concept is inconsistent with the biblical account and the actual genetic evidence.
Why is the existence of Adam and Eve important to Christianity according to the video script?
-The existence of Adam and Eve is important to Christianity because it establishes the concept of original sin and the need for a savior, Jesus Christ. Without a historical Adam and Eve, the script suggests that the foundational beliefs of Christianity are undermined.
What does the script suggest about the worldview of those who reject the biblical account of Adam and Eve?
-The script suggests that those who reject the biblical account of Adam and Eve are influenced by a worldview that prioritizes man's interpretation of the past over God's word, leading to an acceptance of evolutionary theories that do not align with the Bible.
Outlines
🧬 The Debate on Adam and Eve's Genetic Reality
The script opens with a discussion on the historicity of Adam and Eve, addressing the debate between Christian theologians and scientists on whether genetics disproves their existence as a specially created couple by God. The show 'Origins' introduces Dr. Georgia Purdham, a molecular geneticist, who challenges the idea that genetic evidence supports human evolution from ape-like ancestors. The conversation emphasizes the importance of interpretation through the lens of one's worldview, suggesting that many Christians are influenced by the concept of deep time and evolution, leading them to question the biblical account of creation.
🔬 DNA Comparison: Humans, Chimps, and the Search for Common Ancestry
This paragraph delves into the genetic comparison between humans and chimpanzees, questioning the claim that they share a common ancestor. It critiques the selective use of genetic data by evolutionists, highlighting that not all DNA differences are accounted for in the comparison. The script points out that when all types of genetic differences are considered, the similarity between human and chimp DNA is significantly less than the often-cited 98-99%, suggesting a figure closer to 85%. The summary underscores the argument that the genetic evidence does not support the idea of a common ancestor and that the evolutionary interpretation of the data is biased.
👥 Mitochondrial Eve and the Biblical Account of Human Origins
The script discusses the concept of 'Mitochondrial Eve,' contrasting it with the biblical Eve. It explains that mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is inherited solely from the mother and is used to trace maternal lineages. The paragraph challenges the evolutionary timeline that places 'Mitochondrial Eve' at around 100,000 to 300,000 years ago, arguing that the Bible's timeline, which places Eve at approximately 6,000 years ago, is more consistent with the evidence. It also addresses the inconsistencies in the dating of 'Mitochondrial Eve' and the implications of the findings for the belief in a single, recent human origin.
📊 Mitochondrial DNA Analysis and its Alignment with Biblical Chronology
This section presents an analysis of mitochondrial DNA to support the biblical timeline of human history. It discusses the mutation rate of mtDNA and how the observed number of differences in human mtDNA aligns with a young 'Mitochondrial Eve,' consistent with the biblical account of a recent creation of humanity. The script refutes the high ages proposed by evolutionists by pointing out that their calculations are based on incorrect assumptions about human-chimp ancestry. The evidence from mtDNA databases is said to confirm the biblical dates, suggesting that 'Mitochondrial Eve' lived only a few thousand years ago.
🛑 The Theological and Philosophical Implications of the Adam and Eve Debate
The script concludes with a discussion on the theological implications of the existence of Adam and Eve. It emphasizes that if Adam and Eve were not real people, then the concept of original sin and the need for salvation through Jesus Christ is undermined. The paragraph highlights the quote from atheist Frank Zindler, who acknowledges that the acceptance of evolution undermines the central tenets of Christianity. The script argues that the belief in evolution leads to a worldview that is inconsistent with the biblical account of a perfect creation and that the evidence, when properly interpreted, supports the biblical narrative.
📚 The Importance of Biblical Truth in Understanding Human Origins
In the final paragraph, the script reinforces the importance of accepting the biblical account of human origins as foundational to Christian belief. It argues that the evidence from genetics supports the biblical narrative and that a selective reading of Scripture or scientific data undermines the Christian faith. The script calls for a return to the authority of the Bible and a recognition that the truth of the Gospel message is supported by the evidence of creation, as seen through the lens of a biblical worldview.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Adam and Eve
💡Genetics
💡Mitochondrial DNA
💡Creationism
💡Evolution
💡Original Sin
💡Scientific Evidence
💡Chimpanzees
💡Mitochondrial Eve
💡DNA Comparison
💡Biblical Perspective
Highlights
Debate on the reality of Adam and Eve's existence is influenced by genetics and creation beliefs.
Dr. Georgia Purdham, with a PhD in molecular genetics, discusses the genetics of Adam and Eve.
The program 'Origins' aims to validate creation and biblical accuracy with scientific evidence.
Evangelical Christians question the literal existence of Adam and Eve due to evolutionary beliefs.
Some Christians reconcile evolution with creation by suggesting Adam and Eve were created from dust and a rib.
Dr. Purdham argues that selective data presentation in genetic studies supports evolutionary narratives.
Comparing human and chimp DNA reveals significant differences, contrary to common ancestry claims.
Non-aligned DNA and other genetic differences are often overlooked in evolutionary studies.
Dr. Jeffrey Tompkins' research shows a higher genetic difference between humans and chimps than commonly reported.
Mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) is used to trace maternal lineages and challenge evolutionary timelines.
MtDNA evidence supports a young 'Mitochondrial Eve', aligning with biblical timelines.
The concept of 'Mitochondrial Eve' is inconsistent with the idea of multiple women contributing to the gene pool.
Dr. Nathaniel Jennison's research on mtDNA mutation rates supports a recent human origin.
The existence of Adam and Eve is fundamental to understanding the need for salvation in Christianity.
Atheist Frank Zindler acknowledges the impact of biological evolution on the foundation of Christianity.
The program concludes that genetic evidence supports the biblical account of Adam and Eve's recent creation.
Transcripts
a big debate today is whether Adam and
Eve were real people sadly many
Christian theologians and scientists
believe that genetics has disproven the
existence of an original couple
specially created by God however looking
at the many differences between human
and chimp DNA and by comparing the
mitochondrial DNA of people worldwide
observational science shows just the
opposite coming up on today's edition of
origins Adam and Eve genetics with dr.
Georgia Purdham
[Music]
[Applause]
[Music]
[Music]
hello and welcome to origins I'm ray
Heiple it's an honor to be your host
today during this program we showcase
interesting guests who present evidence
from science along with other important
facts validating the truth of creation
and the accuracy of the Bible
today's guest dr. Georgia Purdham
received a PhD in molecular genetics
from the Ohio State University she has
won a variety of honors and been a
professor of biology dr. Purdum has also
published research papers in both
secular and creation peer-reviewed
technical journals she now serves as
ministry content administrator speaker
author and researcher for Answers in
Genesis in Kentucky welcome dr. Purdham
thank you to be here it's good to have
you on the show today we're going to be
talking about Adam and Eve genetics can
you tell us what we're going to be
looking at well you know when people see
that title they probably think well how
do we know anything about the DNA of
Adam and Eve and we're gonna be talking
about it kind of in a different sense
because one of the biggest debates an
evangelical Christian today is whether
or not Adam and Eve are real people and
so that's why it's important to talk
about their genetics so to speak and I
mean this is just a few headlines that
I've grabbed on this issue over the last
several years um things like
evangelicals question the existence of
Adam and Eve did they really exist are
they just an allegory are they a
symbolic representation you know over
and over again and and these come from
both Christian sources as well as
secular sources so really it's a big
question I'm Christian today had this as
the cover of their magazine a few years
ago this search for the historical Adam
the state of the debate wow it is very
much debate yeah it's kind of sad when
you think about the Bible seems to be
pretty clear but I understand matters of
interpretation but still it seems like
the lot depends upon whether or not
there really was an Adam and Eve right
and it really comes down to and when you
said interpretation it comes down to a
lot of people a lot of Christians
unfortunately are buying into the idea
of
millions of years and so they would say
well if we evolved from some sort of
ape-like creature then where's Adam and
Eve in that you know and so it doesn't
fit an evolutionary knew and so they've
had to discard it as a as a result so to
speak of that so I want to share with
you just what a couple of Christians who
are both scientists but they're
Christians but they do believe in
evolution in millions of years and what
they have to say about Adam and Eve and
they said this I think it's very telling
they said Adam was created from dust in
God's breath Eve was created from Adam's
rib none of these explanations can
possibly be actual descriptions human
beings are mainly water not dust and
there is no process by which an adult
person can made quickly from a rib now I
have to kind of yeah that's kind of
laughable it is laughable right because
they're talking about we're talking
about one time supernatural and then in
which guys especially created Adam and
Eve okay and so and so it's not a
natural explanation you know and that's
what people need to understand I agree
it's not a natural one but we're not
talking about natural one well and even
ultimately they say everything came from
the space dust anyway so you know their
criticism here could apply to what they
say right and the thing is as far as
they know these two individuals doctor
Giberson and dr. Colin sue dr. Collins
is a head of the National Institutes of
Health so these are very you know he's
very highly respectable scientist as far
as they know they don't question the
virgin birth or the resurrection of
Jesus Christ but science crooler shows
virgins don't give birth and don't come
back to life so it's a real
inconsistency in their belief system
they go on to say in their book
literalist readings of Genesis imply
that God specially created Adam and Eve
and that all humans are descended from
these original parents such readings
unfortunately do not fit the evidence
right for several reason okay that's a
big claim let's see if they can back
down so they're saying you know well
this is what the Bible seems to say but
we can't believe it because the evidence
and you know when we talk about the
evidence it really comes down to
especially as it relates to the past
obviously Adam and Eve were created in
the past this is not a current thing and
it really depends on our interpretation
of that evidence in light of our
worldview
what are the glasses so to speak that we
used to look at the world and look at
the evidence are we starting with man's
word and and that man knows the truth
about the past millions and billions of
years of evolution or are we starting
with God's word that he knows the truth
about the past that he was an eyewitness
to creation and he has inspired man to
write that down so we're gonna kind of
look at this in two ways we're gonna
look at the genetic evidence and say is
it consistent with what God's Word said
and then we're gonna look at why does it
matter I mean why do we care so much the
Adam and Eve are real people why is that
important to Christianity I know some
Christians who probably would question
that but I think you know the
ramifications and the repercussions of
that could be huge and that's what we
need to talk about so the first thing
that we're gonna do in this is we're
really going to address the question did
humans and chimps share a common
ancestor so basically answering the
question of who right who did we all
descend from and so the first thing we
do as Christians is we always go to
God's Word wait what does God's Word say
and it says that God created animals
according to their kind okay and so we
see that over and over again talking
about the birds and the beasts and the
cattle and everything according to its
kind
obviously birds and or swimming and
flying creatures one day five all the
land animals on day six and so after
he's done creating all of that then he
creates man my man is clearly a separate
creation from the animals and he's
different because he's made in God's
image
we are we're not an animal and so we we
are truly created separate different
individuals from the animals so that's
an important distinction so clearly from
a biblical perspective we did not evolve
from some sort of common ancestor with
the Apes so the question really comes
down to the DNA and one of the things
that's really interesting is we have
sequence DNA for both humans and chimps
okay so we have that information we can
compare them and so what do we find out
when we compare the DNA and dr. Jeffrey
Tompkins who's a geneticist at the
Institute for Creation Creation Research
has done a lot of study on
he's not only looked at what are the
evolutionists have done and what how are
they doing this but he's done a lot of
his own original research and one of the
things he found when he looked at what
the evolutionist is done is that they
have a lot of preferential and selective
treatment on the data data is data
depending on how you what you present
and how you present it you can make a
say what you want it and what you don't
talk about right what you leave out
exactly exactly and so one of the things
is they a lot of times when they do
these comparisons of the DNA they just
use sequences they expect to be similar
okay so for example they just use the
genes the genes are what gives rise to
the proteins now I would expect the
genes to be pretty similar because from
it from a biological perspective chimps
or mammals soar we okay so our DNA
should actually be on that level should
be pretty similar our bodies have to do
similar things so it's not a good place
to look for the differences okay if
we're trying to evaluate what's
different cuz obviously we're very
different from a chimp so what makes us
different and even when they do count
all of the DNA let's say they look at
everything all the bases there are
certain differences they don't count so
they don't count what's called
non-aligned DNA gaps copy number
variations and size differences now you
don't need to know what all of these
things are that's gonna take more
diamond we have all those things are
legitimate differences between human and
chimp DNA but they're not counted okay
and so they are part of the genetic code
or whatever the question here that
they're sequence differences but they
don't count them why because they don't
fit their evolutionary story there's way
if you count all these differences
there's way too many differences to
account for in their evolutionary time
frames and they don't want different
yeah and they're not going to change
what they think about the past so they
have to make it fit so how do they make
it fit well they only count one type of
difference and that's how they make it
fit and that's what we need to
understand is that when you see you know
you probably heard chimp and human DNA
is 98 99 so that's a one to two percent
difference mm-hmm
well you need to realize they're only
looking at one type
this is it they don't tell you that
isn't that fun whenever we write DNA we
write it with four letters representing
the four bases a C T and G and we're
gonna say this top line is human and the
bottom line is chimp here okay so when
you compare the DNA there will be areas
that line up pretty good that are pretty
much you know they're pretty similar now
there's still some differences you can
see that but they're they're very
similar so the only difference the
evolutionists count is differences in
DNA which are called substitutions in
aligned regions
that's all they count so for example
here you have a T right in a human give
a G in the chump you have an A in the
human you have a G in the jump that's
the only difference as they count now
you can see just by looking at this
there's other difference oh yes right
here we have chimp T or human DNA but no
matching Jim there would be a gap that's
called a gap or an endo here's another
one okay so you have chimp but no human
to match it then there's millions of
bases outside of this which is
represented by this
they don't even line up at all they're
not alone so those are legitimate
differences but they're not counted in
to their evolutionary in because it
doesn't fit their evolutionary story
they've even went so far sometimes is to
say oh it's in part of the DNA that
doesn't matter this is all junk DNA out
here so it doesn't matter and so that's
a problem because as we were as we know
through more studies junk DNA really
isn't junk it's really important is
important there's none event that isn't
important so you can't just say oh it's
in part of the DNA that doesn't matter
hmm so so these are legitimate
differences and to say anything other
than that is just downright deceptive
well it looks like I mean if that
representative sequence that you have
there is you know telling for the whole
organism it looks like it would be a lot
higher than 1 to 2% it would be and so
dr. Tompkins has done some more studies
to really look at this what are the
legitimate differences what if you count
them all right then you're looking at an
85 percent similarity overall well
that's a lot less than 99 or not right
that's a 15 percent difference now some
people might think well that's don't on
a lot that's 15 percent of 3 billion
remember
we have three billion base pairs in our
DNA that means that equates to four
hundred and fifty million differences
between humans and chimps that's a lot
that's a lot of difference you can't
account for that in evolutionary time
and it only affects some of the
differences and I don't have time to get
into this but there's what we call non
sequence differences there's layers and
layers of information in DNA and and so
when you start to look at some of these
other differences like structure and
things like that there's even more
difference so this is a highly
conservative number now and this is just
my thought all right at the top would we
see similar pretty high similarities you
know in other mammals like a human and a
rhinoceros or and we haven't really done
that per se because the they want to
look at the closest evolutionary
ancestor so they look at chimps
according to their right according to
their their scheme about the past so
that hasn't been done right but even if
you look at things like I know they've
done it more for like dogs and cats and
things like that you're still talking
pretty high similarity like around this
number we would think that right because
we're ma'am yeah absolutely so there's
no plausible way to account for this in
an evolutionary timing it just doesn't
it simply doesn't work
so in summary humans and chimps do have
DNA similarity no one doubts that but
claims of extremely high levels of
similarity they're just it's just
patently false
there's no way so methods typically are
highly prejudiced to favor that
similarity like they only look at the
genes or they don't count all the
differences so they're just doing it to
try to make it tell the story they
wanted to tell therefore human genetic
comparison human chimp genetic
comparisons do not support common
ancestry there's just no way to get from
point A and that's what they believe
they believe there's a common ancestor
right for humans and chimps and so we
have to have this incredible amount of
similarity to get back there alright now
let's talk about another facet of how we
compare human and chimp DNA and that's
looking at did mitochondrial Eve lived
more than a hundred thousand years ago
okay who is this mitochondrial Eve right
we understand that one
now this is not the eve of the Bible
okay so this is the evolutionary Eve I
guess you could call her she is one
woman of at least 10,000 people that
were alive about a hundred and two
hundred thousand years ago and we're
gonna talk specifically in a little bit
what her mitochondrial DNA is okay it's
a little bit different than what we just
talked about okay so I'll get to that
this is not the biblical Eve right she
was one woman only one woman 6000 years
ago okay so this is one of many women a
hundred thousand years ago okay very
different all right so now again we know
from Scripture that's where we always
start god created one woman that was it
there was not ten thousand people alive
there was only one and we also know
there was one woman that as far as how
long ago this was we know the age of the
earth and universe from Scripture we can
calculate that we know there's about two
thousand years between Adam and Abraham
two thousand years between Abraham and
Jesus and two thousand years between
Jesus and today which gives us a grand
total of six thousand years so they
don't have there's no hundreds of
thousands of years okay it's just not in
Scripture at all
so one woman we know six thousand years
ago so again if the if the Bible is true
then science should confirm that and
support that and we'll see that indeed
does so let me talk about what
mitochondrial DNA is all right this is a
cross-section of a cell and what we
talked about before we were talking when
we compared human and chimp DNA where
time had the DNA in the nucleus of the
cell that's where you get the 3 billion
base pairs but we also have DNA in
another part of our cell and that's the
mitochondria okay mitochondria are kind
of bean shaped and they produce energy
okay that we need they're the
powerhouses of this out there energy
factories and they have their own little
piece of DNA okay it's small it's only
about 16,000 basis and it's circular
yeah so it's not like your typical you
know we usually think of that as a
chromosome that's linear this isn't a
circle actually so it's very very
different now what's interesting is you
only and
from your mother you do not inherit it
from your father like you do with the
nuclear DNA so it's different so I just
show this diagram this is going to
represent the mitochondrial DNA okay
so if this couple has a daughter she'll
pass that to her it's in the egg the
sperm does not contribute any
mitochondrial DNA okay so it's only
coming from mom so you can use this DNA
to actually trace maternal lineages okay
so just like you could use Y chromosome
because that's only in guys for paternal
lineages okay so that's just the
difference now not everyone has the same
mitochondrial DNA
we're not clones okay it's not identical
but it's very very very similar there's
only a few differences and so what the
evolutionists believe even they believe
that there's only one line today in
people there's only one basic
mitochondrial DNA that everybody has and
it's very very similar from an
evolutionary perspective this is kind of
hard to understand because if a hundred
thousand years ago there was ten
thousand people let's say half of them
are women okay so let's say there's five
thousand that are women that would be
five potentially five thousand different
lines okay of mitochondrial DNA and
we're only down to one today I mean how
you go from five thousand to one huh I
mean that the odds on that are pretty
pretty remote but if you start with the
biblical account
there was only one one that makes sense
so there's generally every one today
right it's hard to it's really hard to
explain this from an evolutionary
perspective anyone that tries well they
might say that maybe a lot of the women
didn't reproduce or they had they had
sons you know they can come up with all
kinds of explanations but they're just
rescuing at my rescue and make this
world worse fit the data again right
when it's when it's really hard and so
we would expect this from a biblical
perspective there should only be one and
there shouldn't be that many differences
but even the evolutionists can't seem to
figure out how old she is okay even if
they do believe there's one and they
have a heart
time with that so in 2009 she was a
hundred and eight thousand years old in
2012 she was between 250 and 300
thousand years old and in 2013 she was
157 okay so which is it
I don't know they can't decide but each
of these ages they have assumed human
chimp ancestry to do the calculation so
that at some point they've compared
human DNA human mitochondrial DNA to
chimp mitochondrial DNA now what's the
problem with that we're not related
right so there are gonna be a lot of
differences so if you put that in here
to get more differences you have to have
more time right so it elevates it
exaggerate these numbers they're not
what they're supposed to be because
they're doing an incorrect comparison so
once again their results are colored by
the fact that their starting point is
wrong right right now what's interesting
is in 1997 some evolutionists produced a
paper in which they said mitochondrial
Eve was 65 hundred years old Wow
and you're like whoa wait a minute
that's really close to the biblical
timeframe yes it is and when I looked at
the paper I'm like how did they get an
age in a correct age basically for yeah
well even though they believe humans and
chimps are related and have this shared
ancestry they did not take that into
account when they did their calculation
they just compared humans to humans and
what did they get the biblical timeframe
Wow that is fastened it is because
humans are all related that's why
they're getting the correct number and
dr. Nathaniel Jennison who's at Answers
in Genesis he's his geneticist there
he's been doing some of his own studies
on this he said you know we know the
mutation rate of mitochondrial DNA we
know how fast it mutates so she's what
the evolutionists say 157 thousand years
old we should see about a thousand
differences in the human population if
she's only six thousand years old not
much time we should only see about 20 to
79 differences in the human population
so we can look there's mitochondrial DNA
databases it can look at all this what
did he find
77 differences in humans what is that
confirm right she's young right that
mitochondrial DNA is
young mitochondrial Eve has to be young
if she was really this old if she was
really 157 thousand years old we should
see it should be somewhere up here right
and it's not there's so few of
differences so she has to be really
young so the evidence again supports
what the Bible says so
in summary here the male and female
ancestor of us all we know the biblical
Adam Eve the true biblical Adam Eve live
very recently we know that according to
the biblical chronology that it was only
6,000 years ago and we know that
mitochondrial DNA analysis confirms the
biblical dates very fascinating we're
going to come back to this in just a few
moments I want you to stay with us we're
looking at Adam and Eve were they real
come back with us
[Music]
you
[Music]
welcome back to origins we're talking to
dr. Georgia Purdham who's been sharing
some fascinating things about Adam and
Eve have illusionists claimed that there
could have been no Adam and Eve from the
studies that they've done in DNA but you
presented evidence that shows the exact
opposite right and many times they're
not being totally truthful with the
information unfortunately selecting
certain parts to show so that it can fit
the evolutionary story that they want a
towel because you know if you think
about it Adam and Eve were created by
God they were perfect but they sinned
they sell and as a result of that and
because we all dissed them from them we
all have a sin nature which is why we
need Jesus Christ
I mean if Adam and Eve aren't real
people and there is no fall then why do
we need Jesus I mean that's what this
issue really really comes down to and
what's interesting to me is that the
people that understand this wall are the
atheist and so I want to share with just
a quote from one of them Frank Zindler
he said the most devastating thing
though that biology did to Christianity
was a discovery of biological evolution
now that we know that Adam and Eve never
were real people the central myth of
Christianity is destroyed if there never
was an Adam and Eve there never was an
original sin right this is important
there was never an original sin there's
no need a salvation if there is no need
of salvation there is no need of a
savior that's right on I completely
agree with that conclusion that's why I
say with the Atheist I don't normally
agree but I agree a hundred percent with
him there he's absolutely right and and
that's that's what the Bible says right
there for just just do one man sin
entered the world and death they said
and thus death spread to all men because
all sinned and again in first
Corinthians right for it's an Adam all
die even so in Christ all shall be made
alive but that link between the first
Adam and the last Adam Jesus Christ and
it and it really does matter because of
man's actions because man's sin that's
when death entered this world right
evolutionists believe it's been here oh
wow yeah that's part of life it's
natural right it was never perfect and
it's doing perfect according to them but
here's the problem for Christians though
to believe that right to believe in
death and
suffering and disease before Adam's sin
because if because what do you God say
after he created everything he said this
very good very good but if he used
evolution then that means death disease
and suffering aren't very good animals
preying on one another killing one
another fear and terror and brutality
totally inconsistent with the God of the
Bible it's really a heart issue it
really is a worldview issue and a heart
issue ultimately who do we believe is
the authority we're knowing about the
past is it God or is it man as we see in
the science supports God's Word is truth
and it's important for the Gospel
message itself you know it reminds me
where Jesus said that he came to bear
witness of the truth and everyone who is
of the truth hears his voice and at one
point he says to his opponents you do
not believe in me because I tell you the
truth and man has this this sin nature
that doesn't want to bow the knee to God
and and we see that in science and we
see that in you know unfortunately in
the church when when Christians don't
want to listen to what the Bible says or
when you know scientists don't want to
go where the evidence actually goes well
I really thank you for being with us on
this program it was very fascinating and
very important I hope you enjoyed the
program today it really is foundational
we have to know that the Bible is true
and if we just sort of pick and choose
what we think might be there we're gonna
be left without a foundation but
thankfully as we look at Scripture and
as we look at the world around us we see
that there really was an Adam and Eve
we've seen that from science today we've
seen that from DNA our genetics the most
smallest component of the cell shows us
that there had to have been an Adam and
Eve about the time the Bible says when
it was well it just goes to show us that
we know that what the Bible says is true
and the proof is all around you thanks
for joining us for this edition of
origins we'll see you next
thank you for watching this edition of
origins for a DVD of this series you can
order online or send a twelve dollar
donation to cover shipping and handling
and right to you origins program number
1804 cornerstone network wall
Pennsylvania one five one four eight
this presentation was made possible by
the faithful prayers and financial
support of you our cornerstone family
[Music]
Browse More Related Video
P1 | Christian Homeschool Speech and Debate Students and Sheikh Uthman | One Message Foundation
Spencer Wells Building a family tree for all humanity
Every " ORIGIN ADAM AND EVE " Explained in 13 minutes
Social Orders and Creation Stories: Crash Course World Mythology #5
#F444 Terapia das Doenças Espirituais.01- As três consequências do pecado
What does the original Hebrew text reveal about Genesis 1-11? - Dr. Steve Boyd
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)