Did a Recent Scientific Study Prove All Humans Descended from a Single Couple?

        Recently there was some excitement over a scientific study that suggested all humans descended from a single couple after the human race was nearly wiped out following a catastrophic event. Many Christians on social media and even Christian media outlets posted and reported on the study, declaring that once again, science had proven the Bible to be accurate. It was assumed that the findings referred to Noah and his wife (some said Adam and Eve, but of course Noah and his wife make more sense), and it was claimed as a victory for Christianity and the Bible. 

        However, when I looked into it further, I discovered that the study was not saying what many thought. It is not my desire to pour cold water on everyone’s excitement, but at the same time, I feel that we as Christians must be careful about accepting things too quickly simply because they seem to confirm what we already believe. The following points demonstrate that the article can’t be used to support the story of Noah and his wife: 

        1. The study suggests that these ancestors lived between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago, which is difficult to reconcile with the Biblical account of Noah. 

        2. The conclusions were based on measurements of the mitochondrial DNA of humans. Apparently our mitochondrial DNA contains far less genetic diversity would be expected, which suggests the human population must have been reduced to a very small number at some point, resulting in the elimination of most of our genetic diversity. But that small number was not necessarily only two people; indeed, several thousand would have produced the same result (the suggestion of two is simply more effective for grabbing the reader’s attention!). 

        3.  The time period estimated (between 100,000 and 200,000 years ago) is vast enough that the study in no way suggests that there was a single catastrophic event; they believe it’s far more likely to have been many smaller events over time. The authors state that there is no geological evidence for a global catastrophic event at that time, and that if there had been, there would have been a simultaneous increase in the extinction rate of many other species, which they don’t find. 

4. The authors state specifically that their findings have been used by some religious people to support various creation accounts, but that in those cases the study is being misunderstood. The authors believe their findings are based on and support Darwinian evolution. 

It is important to note at this point that I’m not commenting at all on whether the above assumptions or conclusions are correct. My concern is only to point out that the study does not say what many Christians believed it did. I decided to write about this study because I think it brings up an important issue for Christians to be aware of. In the eyes of many non-believers, Christians already seem to have a contentious relationship with science, and while this does not mean we should give in to pressure and surrender to naturalism, we also should do what we can to avoid needlessly perpetuating the idea that science and Christianity are in conflict. 

        Particularly, I believe we as Christians are too quick to accept a scientific discovery if it seems to support our interpretation of the Bible, and to automatically reject any scientific discovery that seems to contradict it. If we do, it may appear to those on the outside we care more about supporting what we want to believe rather than being open-minded and discovering the truth. If we’re not careful and indiscriminately accept a particular scientific study, we risk an embarrassing and reputation-damaging situation in which we must retract our victorious declaration once we discover more information. And to change our minds so quickly in this way will only perpetuate the perception that Christians choose what we believe based not on evidence, but on what we want to believe. Some examples of this are the claims many of us likely have heard of the discovery of Noah’s ark, the bones of giants (assumed to be the Nephilim in Genesis), or chariot wheels at the bottom of the Red Sea. All of these, however, have turned out to be untrue. In fact, the pictures of the giant bones were photoshopped! And yet, they still are occasionally posted on social media. 

        The bottom line is that we should be cautious and skeptical of any new scientific discoveries, and not be too quick to declare a victory for the Christian worldview before determining whether the study does in fact say what we think it says, or before there is sufficient support for its findings. The fact that a discovery seems to support creation is not enough to show that its findings are true. While it is an uphill battle, we need to do our best to correct the perception that Christianity is anti-science and that all Christians are scientifically illiterate. Restraining our enthusiasm and checking thoroughly into any new discovery (no matter how exciting) before declaring it a victory for Christianity will help towards this end. In this way we can do our part to avoid giving anyone an opportunity to undermine the credibility of Christianity.