In this eye-opening episode of Real Science Radio, Fred Williams and Doug McBurney welcome Donnie and Matt from Standing for Truth Ministries. Together, they unravel the complexities of creation science, focusing on the genetic evidence supporting the existence of a historical Adam and Eve. The conversation challenges conventional evolutionary theories with data-driven insights and biblical interpretations, making it a must-listen for anyone interested in the harmony between faith and science.
Science has literally discovered the first couple, our first parents, Eve, the mother of all living, Adam, the first man in genetics. We can trace back every man to one single Y chromosome ancestor and every single human back to a single mitochondrial DNA ancestor.
SPEAKER 02 :
Welcome to the brightest audience in the country. This is Real Science Radio. I’m Fred Williams.
SPEAKER 04 :
And I’m Doug McBurney, Bible student, science geek, amateur comedian. We have a power-packed show lined up, one that hits right at the foundation of a biblical worldview.
SPEAKER 02 :
That’s right. So joining us is the team from a very familiar name in creation science, Standing for Truth Ministries. So I’d like to welcome Donnie and Matt to Real Science Radio.
SPEAKER 01 :
Fred, Doug, it is an honor to be with you brothers. I appreciate all the work that your team are doing at Real Science Radio. I’ve watched endless of your programs and radio shows, and I really do love the way that you guys tackle the critics, tackle challenges. You’re doing a great job, so it really is a privilege to be with you both. Awesome. Thank you, Donnie. Matt, introduce yourself.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, hi, guys. I’m Matt.
SPEAKER 04 :
Hi, Matt.
SPEAKER 03 :
I am the video editor for Standing for Truth. So that takes up all of my time when I would rather be doing other things.
SPEAKER 01 :
And sometimes I force them to do debates with me and jump in on some of these open mics that we do. As Matt knows, we just did a debate seminar on this topic, Adam and Eve. So a lot of this information is fresh on our minds, and we’re excited to present that for you guys.
SPEAKER 02 :
And so for those who don’t know, Standing for Truth Ministries, they run a debate fairly regularly. I’ve got you on my feed, guys, and it’ll pop up in a little window on the bottom like, oh, that’s got to be one I’ve got to tune into. You guys are growing. Your channel’s doing really well, and it keeps getting larger. You guys have had some great debates on there. Really appreciate it. You guys are doing a ton of work. What got you started? I think Bob Enyart. Didn’t you interview him early on? We did.
SPEAKER 01 :
We did years ago, three to four years ago. We had the privilege of interviewing Bob Enyart and Brian Nickell. oh yeah yeah that was a comprehensive program we went for a few hours on the flood and the hydro plate theory and specifically debunked the so-called heat problem and so we’ve had many guests I think we’ve done over 150 interviews I’ve hosted Approximately 450 debates over the last five or six years. So it helps me. I feel like I’m always learning when I’m hosting or moderating a debate. Awesome.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, that’s what’s great having you on the show because you’ve got this wide knowledge of creation science because of all the interactions you’re doing with the evolutionists. And, you know, a lot of times the best way to learn the arguments is to actually engage people. I hate to say it, but the enemy. I know that whenever I’ve got an article I’ve written that has to do with creation, the first people I want to review it are evolutionists because they’re going to work really hard to find something wrong with it. So I really appreciate the vast amount of knowledge that you’ve gained. When you had me on your show, I was just impressed with how much you knew about all the different arguments. So I guess today you’re going to present on Adam and Eve, the scientific evidence for Adam and Eve.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yeah, that’s right, Fred. Now, and before we get into today’s main topic, which, as you said, Fred, scientific evidence for Adam and Eve, and we’re hoping to get to something that it has so many syllables, I may not get this right. You might have to help me. Endogenous retroviruses. Did I get that right?
SPEAKER 01 :
You got that right, the so-called best evidence. The so-called, I should say.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, well, that adds even more syllables. So-called endogenous. We hope to get to that. But you mentioned that you interviewed Bob Enyart, and I just, full disclosure. I got my first opportunity in broadcasting because I got a phone call from a show called Politically Correct in the 90s where Bob was becoming kind of a regular guest and they wanted Bob on. But Bob was unfortunately otherwise engaged in prison ministry at the time. at the Arapahoe County Jail, no, Jefferson County Jail at the time. And so the interviewer interviewed me over the phone and I ended up getting booked on politically incorrect because Bob was doing jail ministry. And that’s how I actually fell backwards into some sort of broadcasting career or hobby or whatever.
SPEAKER 02 :
So for those who don’t know, politically incorrect back in the day, that was Bill Maher.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, now known as Real Time. Pretty much the same, not quite the same format. He always had like three or five liberals, and then he would have on one conservative. And Bob and I were the one conservative, and we manhandled them pretty well. Although I don’t know if those shows exist anymore. I know my mom has a copy.
SPEAKER 01 :
Oh, that’s fun. Yeah, you’re thrown into the lion’s den, but that’s good. So many get to hear the truth. One of my first experiences with Bob Enyart was a very long, I think, four to five hour debate. I think it probably took place over a few different shows with Aaron Raw on the phylogeny challenge. That was a blast.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, and Aaron Ra is still out there, and we’re still hoping to have the opportunity to be the Christian that converts Aaron Ra, because that’ll just be a wonderful day, and all the angels in heaven will cheer when Aaron Ra converts. I do actually pray for that. He’ll make a great creationist. He would. He’d be phenomenal. Anyway, just thinking of him as a creationist, you really can’t help but laugh. But we do hope that he eventually accepts the forgiveness for his sins and believes in Jesus’ death, burial, and resurrection. Aaron, don’t be a fool. The fool has said in his heart there is no God. Now let’s talk Adam and Eve, and let’s talk about Adam and Eve. Can we start in the Bible, gentlemen?
SPEAKER 01 :
Amen. Yes. The best place to start… is the Bible. What does the Bible say? And I’ll go over a few slides here. One of our favorite topics, we do like to focus on the topic of Adam, Eve, and separate ancestry. And one of many things that I love about this topic is it does answer Arun Ra, who we were just talking about, his phylogeny challenge. Where do we draw a line in ancestry? Can we point to a biological organism that based on the scientific data is unrelated to any other form of life? And we’ve done that. in humans and we’ve confirmed what the Bible says through empirical scientific data. And so let’s go over briefly what does the Bible say on the issue? Do we read about common ancestry in Genesis? Does the Bible give any hints at humans being related to chimpanzees and banana plants? Because that’s what universal common descent would teach that we’re all related Through common ancestry, both plants, animals, so you, Doug, you, Fred, and Matt, you’re related to a strawberry and a mosquito according to common descent. Does the Bible teach this? Let’s see. Genesis 2, 7, and the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground. And breathed into his nostrils the breath of life and man became a living soul. Genesis 2, specifically 22. And the rib which the Lord God had taken from man made he a woman. And so the book of Genesis, as we can see, is making several genetic statements with significant implications. What did Jesus say about the issue? Well, Matthew 19, 4, and he answered and said unto them, have you not read that he which made them at the beginning, referring back to creation week, when he created Adam and Eve on day six, made them male and female? Mark 10, 6, but from the beginning of the creation, God made them male and female. The Bible calls Adam the first man, 1 Corinthians 15, 45. And Genesis 3, 20 calls Eve the mother of all living. So gentlemen, do we see common descent? Do we see human evolution in those important passages? No. The Bible is clearly claiming there’s no common ancestry between humans and any other form of life. And so the question is, Does the scientific data support or confirm the Bible’s teaching on human origins? The Bible claims to be the history book of the universe.
SPEAKER 04 :
All right. Now, before we jump to science, I just want to finish with the Bible because there are some of our beloved Christian brothers and sisters who neglect science. The truth that you just revealed from the Bible that God says he created them male and female from the beginning of the creation. When was that? Oh, the beginning of the creation. So not after even thousands of years, not millions of years, not billions of years, but at the beginning of the creation. And just one more, one of my favorites. Jesus Christ talks about the righteous blood of Abel. And he talks about Abel as a specific individual, a genuine historic individual. So for whether you’re an evolutionist and you want to hear about science, we’re going to get into that. But for our Christian brothers and sisters, look at what the Bible says and understand that the Bible is a history book. And it’s always best to take it literally unless the text makes it obvious that it’s figurative. So let’s jump into the science.
SPEAKER 01 :
Well, you nailed it, Doug. The existence of a historical Adam and Eve is essential theologically. The prophets, the New Testament authors, Jesus Christ himself refers back to these early chapters, refers back to Adam, to Eve, to Noah. And so we need to take this as literal history. We interpret the Bible literarily. We understand when something is historical. And so what does the science say? And we’re going to hand it to Matt to go over some of the science, but I will give just a teaser here that science has literally discovered the first couple, our first parents, Eve, the mother of all living, Adam, the first man in genetics. We can trace back every man to one single Y chromosome ancestor and every single human back to a single mitochondrial DNA ancestor Matt did you want to touch on some of that data brother oh yeah you do you’re right I do
SPEAKER 03 :
We’re going to, we can talk about pretty much everything that the Bible claims about these two people being literal and real. And we can deduce from every claim that’s made backing it up by science. So that’s what I like. So for example, the Bible claims that Adam was made from the dirt and the dust of the ground. So therefore we should find those minerals in human beings and they’re not that they are inside of us. Adam was created separately from all of the animals at the very end, the pinnacle of all creation. Adam was placed in the garden, which would be an actual location. He was told to eat strictly from the fruits of the trees, all but one. Adam and Eve was made from him, another perfect creation. He was told that he could eat from a tree and that if he did, he would start aging. Do we know what that tree is? I think we do. Adam’s genetic potential for life was about a thousand years. Another thing, can we validate this in genetics? Interesting, I think we can. Adam was then kicked out of Eden and he was told to do what? He had now had to till the land for food. So therefore, can we validate this through science? Again, we can. And again, if he was made at the last day of creation, according to genealogies, about six to seven thousand years ago, can we prove that in genetics? And all of those claims in the Bible, we can do. So take your pick.
SPEAKER 04 :
Okay, well you said two things that intrigued me. The first one is, and maybe I heard you wrong, correct me, I think you implied that we know what tree it was?
SPEAKER 03 :
That’s right, because of the descriptions that are mentioned outside of Scripture in the Dead Sea Scrolls. You see, what happened is when you start looking in these different books, you start noticing that it describes things about the tree being very specific, the type of wood that’s on the tree, what the fruit looks like, how it’s bunched together, how it’s golden in color and looks like grapes, how the smell of the fruit gives off an aroma that’s very pleasing, how the shapes of the leaves are. Well, guess what? When you start looking into the plants, you can deduce where this tree is and what type of tree it actually is. I even have a video on the Standing for Truth channel. It’s called The Quest for the Tree of Knowledge. And that one is where we go through a walkthrough of all of those individual things to trace us down to the actual tree.
SPEAKER 02 :
So guys, are you aware of Bob Inyart’s take on this? He’s got a video on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Actually, it’s an audio. It’s Really interesting. I’m just curious if you guys have heard it. I have not, no. It’s based on a story in Ezekiel. And it’s really interesting how there’s a parallel. You know, there’s parallels drawn between, you know, the king of, I think it was Tyre and Doug, you can correct me if I’m wrong, and the devil. And then it gets into the king of Syria, I think, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. You guys got to see it. It’s so fantastic. Long story short, there was this huge tree. And evil men went to cut it down because they thought it was like sucking up all the water. And there’s this idea that after the tree was cut down, by the way, it says all the branches landed on the mountainside. And then this, when Bob, when he’s telling me this story, actually I was listening to it on audio, I’m thinking, well, this isn’t in Genesis. I actually went back and I read like almost all of Genesis, and I told Bob, that’s not in Genesis. And I hadn’t heard part two. And the second part of it was, it’s somewhere in Ezekiel, And it talks about this tree in the garden and how evil men cut it down. And we think that could have, now this is speculation, that that could have been what triggered the global flood. So anyways, I was curious if you guys had heard the story, and if you haven’t, You guys got to check it out, and we’ll link to it in the show. Yes, please do. I’d love to check that out, Fred.
SPEAKER 04 :
Yes, and so Bob doesn’t get into what genus or species the tree was or what type of fruit it bore, but it sounds like maybe you have a video that does get into some of that, and we probably shouldn’t let the cat out of the bag here. We should probably point people to that video, including myself.
SPEAKER 03 :
We could. We could. The reason why I like it so much is I went on another quest. The quest series is the series that I have that I really try to go deep down the rabbit holes on these things. And one of them was the quest for Eden. Where was the location of Eden? A lot of people think, oh, it’s the Middle East. It’s right there where the Ark came down. That makes no sense on a global flood for the Ark to float up a whole year and then float right back down in the same exact position that it was created in. So where was it actually made? Like what’s going on? What is gopher wood? Like what is all these things? So you go, what was in the Garden of Eden? It was full of all kinds of gems and precious metals and things that aren’t in the Middle East. It was growing herbs and spices that don’t grow there. So clearly Eden wasn’t right there, but where was it? And the coolest part ever is using cartography, going back to the oldest maps on Earth, they all show the Garden of Eden. I can show you right now the Garden of Eden on almost all of the oldest maps in the world, even going to Christopher Columbus’s map that he drew. He drew exactly where Eden was.
SPEAKER 04 :
Oh, wow. You know, a lot of people don’t know that Christopher Columbus was on a bit of a Christian quest himself, you know, as he went out searching. The world.
SPEAKER 03 :
Exactly. And these are all little bits and pieces of the puzzle that when you get it all together and it fits, you’re looking at all the evidence and you’re just like, this is incredible. This is a real historical event in people. They’re not mythical, allegorical stories that are just kind of placed in there for no reason. And when you realize like, wow, this is good evidence, you would think that other Christians would be the first to be like, amazing. I can’t, this is like what I need to share with everybody. But they kind of like, oh, I don’t know. It’s just my church doesn’t teach that they’re real people. So I don’t really see the point. It’s a shame.
SPEAKER 04 :
OK, so now I don’t want to let the cat out of the bag on the tree, but you said something else that I found intriguing. You said that God warned Adam that the day he ate from that tree, he would begin aging. What did you mean by that? Where’d you get that?
SPEAKER 03 :
Well, the Hebrew text says, I believe it’s like muah, muah. It’s a Hebrew word for in death you shall die. And what that is is when they eat from the tree, we translated it as the day you eat of it, you will die. But they didn’t die that day. So what’s going on? Well, when you look at the original translation, it doesn’t say that you’ll die immediately. It says that you will begin dying. So what happened is they were kicked away from the tree of life, which was granting them immortality, and they ate from the tree that caused them to sin. And therefore, now aging was introduced into the body and they started accumulating mutations and they started aging biologically. And their maximum genetic lifespan was about a thousand years. That’s why the patriarchs live around 930 to 960. And then after the flood, it’s a dramatic drop in lifespan. So something caused them to start aging, and it was from eating that tree that sin was introduced, and they were now exiled from the tree of life that was in the Garden of Eden.
SPEAKER 01 :
I think the Hebrew phrase there is mote to moot.
SPEAKER 04 :
And the English translation, in the day… that thou eat of it thou shalt surely die in the day doesn’t imply necessarily it had to be that day the implication can easily be taken that that meant in the day that you do that You’re going to begin this process of dying. Rest assured, that’s the day that the die has been cast, and your death is imminent. And so, interesting stuff. Very interesting stuff. Now, we can’t get out of the Bible and the Dead Sea Scrolls now, but you talked about cartography. Let’s try to jump into some science.
SPEAKER 02 :
Well, hey, before we do that, guys, I want to bring up something really quick. It’s in the same vein. So I was at a Bible study, and one of the guys in the Bible study goes to one of those liberal churches with, like Matt was talking about, they don’t believe in a literal Adam and Eve. But he said he actually believed that the earth was young, 6,000 years, and that there was a literal Adam and Eve. And it was because of a verse in the Bible and not because of science. And I wanted to throw this out. So he was referring to Romans 6, 23 and verses like it where for the wages of sin is death. And so he saw evolution as all this massive amount of death before sin came in the world. But the Bible teaches that death is because of sin. And he said that was the one thing that convinced him. It wasn’t the science or anything else. He doesn’t really like the science. But that was another part of the Bible that just points against this whole idea of evolution. So… All right, so Matt, take it away. Let’s hear the, or Matt or Donnie, whoever wants to present on the genetic evidence.
SPEAKER 03 :
Yeah, we have lots of scientific evidence we can go over. One of our favorites is that we can actually look at the mutations that accumulate every generation and rewind them backwards in time to the point where you land on no mutation. And that takes us right back to Adam and Eve. And these are called genealogical germline mutation rate studies or pedigree mutation rate studies. And they’re in all of the published peer-reviewed literature. So when they say, oh, it’s just creationist content, that is completely untrue. False. And Donnie and I love to go through those papers and show them directly from the literature. No, these mutation rates from these secular scientists take us right back to the biblical timeline. And when they say, oh, well, sure, whatever, that’s just one person. That can happen. Most recent common ancestor doesn’t mean the first one. Aha! But now you have to explain why every animal also has the same mutation rate and also goes back to the biblical timeline of Noah’s flood. Good luck trying to do that one. So…
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah, I know. We’ve talked about mitochondrial Eve, a study by Ann Gibbons. And when they looked at the mitochondrial clock, and they ended up getting much more data. I think the Romanov family of Russia, they had more DNA data. And so she says in a science article, a science magazine article, that mitochondrial leave would be a mere 6,000 years old. 6,000 years old. And then, of course, her very next sentence was, well, that can’t be the case. And, you know, what they ended up doing was they ended up mixing chimp DNA with human DNA to get the dates around 200,000 years. Right. An assumption. A totally circular, bogus argument. They assume evolution is true. So like, oh, we’re related to chimps. So let’s do this comparison again, or let’s do this clock again. And with the assumption that we’re related to chimps, oh, look what happens. It’s 200,000 years instead of 6,000.
SPEAKER 01 :
I’d like to cover something briefly, gentlemen, that I think will be fascinating to your audience. And perhaps Matt can expand on the significance of the observed mutation rate and how we can get these mutation rates from what’s called pedigree studies, where we look at for example, grandparents, parents, and kids. So if it’s the mitochondrial DNA, you can look at grandmothers, mothers, daughters, count up the differences in which you get is a fast rate. And the same thing is true for the Y chromosome. The rate is very fast, about one to three per generation. What the significance is for the origin of Adam and Eve, how far they go back, We can have Matt touch on, but here is some fascinating evidence that supports what Genesis nine 19 says. These are the three sons of Noah and of them was the whole earth overspread. Well, right here is a mitochondrial DNA phylogenetic tree. What you can do and specifically Dr. Nathaniel Jensen of AIG did this. He took mitochondrial DNA worldwide. And he compared them in a phylogenetic tree like this. Mitochondrial DNA, it’s what’s called uniparentally inherited DNA. So it’s only passed down on one side, specifically the mother’s side. It’s outside of the nucleus. It’s a smaller DNA compartment. It’s about 16,500 letters long. It’s involved in energy production. And we’ve been able to trace back all worldwide mitochondrial DNA to a single woman. But in terms of this phylogenetic tree, amazingly, what you’ll notice is right in the middle, you’ll have these, you see these three arrows, you’ve got three nodes. So what does the Bible say in Genesis 9, 19? Well, the earth… was overspread by three reproducing couples, right? You have the flood bottleneck, and you have Noah, his wife, their three sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and their three wives. Those would be the daughters-in-law of Noah. Now, we just learned that mitochondrial DNA is inherited maternally, so if what the Bible says, again in Genesis 919, if that’s true, then in the mitochondrial DNA, we should be able to trace back all mitochondrial DNA to three main starting points. And in technical terms, what these are, the evolutionary community doesn’t even contest this. These are the L, M and N haplogroups, these three major nodes. And so on this tree, this is a phylogenetic tree. These lines, they represent DNA differences or mutations. And the line separating, this is very interesting. The line separating these three major nodes, they’re short. Okay, so if the lines are mutations, that means these women here are only separated by a few mutations, less than 10 easily. The lines radiating out, as you can see, they’re very long. a lot longer than the line separating L, M and N. That means more time, more mutations, more diversity. So what is this tree representing? Well, I think it’s amazing. You’ve got pre-flood mutations here. The three women that came off of the ark, specifically Shem, Ham and Japheth’s wives and radiating out from them are post-flood mutations, post-flood people, post-flood individuals and people groups. And so amazingly, we can trace back mitochondrial DNA to three major haplogroups. The Bible says that we’ve all come from three reproducing couples. To the evolutionists, this has to be a coincidence. But to the biblical creationists like us three, this is amazing confirmation of what Genesis says about human origins. Amen.
SPEAKER 04 :
Good stuff.
SPEAKER 02 :
Yeah. So everything’s tracing back to three women. So how many women were on the ark?
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah, well, technically on the ark, good question. You have four, Noah’s wife. So assuming that Noah and his wife didn’t have any more daughters, then the three founding couples basically would be Shem, Ham, Japheth, and their three wives. Yeah.
SPEAKER 02 :
And so I think maybe we throw in an interesting aside. What do you say, Doug? Oh, no.
SPEAKER 04 :
I don’t know, Fred. I don’t know if that’s necessary. Is that really necessary at this point?
SPEAKER 02 :
I wonder if it is, only because Dominic Inyart did a short on this topic. And so not on this, what we’re talking about here, Donnie and Matt. But it’s on the three daughters of Eve that I think that was the name of the paper that Dr. Carter, Rob Carter, did originally on this, which was fantastic. We totally agree. This is huge evidence for the Bible. But something that Bob, some research he had did that I just want to mention. It’ll take about a minute. And when I say a minute, because I want to play a one-minute short that Dominic Inyart did on this.
SPEAKER 01 :
Yeah, that’s great.
SPEAKER 02 :
So you had the four women on the ark. And so it gets to the question of the reason that Canaan was… That wraps up today’s episode of Real Science Radio. But we’re just getting started. Join us next week as we dive even deeper into the hard genetic evidence for the literal Adam and Eve and watch as one of the evolutionists’ favorite arguments, indigenous retroviruses, gets absolutely torn to shreds. You don’t want to miss it.
In this eye-opening episode of Real Science Radio, Fred Williams and Doug McBurney welcome Donnie and Matt from Standing for Truth Ministries. Together, they unravel the complexities of creation science, focusing on the genetic evidence supporting the existence of a historical Adam and Eve. The conversation challenges conventional evolutionary theories with data-driven insights and biblical interpretations, making it a must-listen for anyone interested in the harmony between faith and science.
