Origins: Adam & Eve Genetics

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]

Channel: Cornerstone Television Network

Views: 298,131

Rating: 4.6466274 out of 5

Keywords: Pittsburgh, CTVN, Cornerstone Television, Christian TV, Cornerstone Television Network, Christianity, talk show, 700 Club, TV show, Adam & Eve Genetics, Adam and Eve, Adam and Eve Bible, evolution, Creationism, Creation Science, Dr. Georgia Purdom, DNA, human DNA, Chimp DNA, genetics

Id: pYi9-XmUoAw

Length: 26min 32sec (1592 seconds)

Published: Mon Mar 12 2018

Reddit Comments

[u/YOUREABOT]

Great video. The evidence is the parent blood genes: Adam A, Eve B, Cane O and rhesus came in with nephilim beastiality. Most destroyed in flood exdept for Hams wife. Evilution is easoly disproved if you incestigate this: The earth is flat. The opening images disclose the depth of this Strong Delusion and lack of awareness