Bob Dutko: Interviewing Swamidass on the GAE

This Monday (Dec. 2nd, 2019) at 12:30pm to 1:30pm CST, Bob Dutko (a YEC) is interviewing me on his radio show (listen at WMUZ 103.5 FM).

Dutko explained, earlier this year, his objections to the idea of God using evolution to create us:

According to evolution, hominids would have been evolving over millions of years, getting a little more “human” like over the years until eventually the first fully human man was born. That’s when God would have said “okay, we now have ‘man’, and I’ll call him ‘Adam’”. Let’s now compare that to how God told Moses he created Adam in Genesis. Genesis 2:7 says “the Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground” . Here’s where a little simple logic is required. How can anyone honestly interpret Adam being “formed from the dust of the ground” to mean “Adam was conceived and born of a part human, part monkey hominid mother”? The Bible then says that God “ breathed into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being” . However, if God really used evolution, and Adam was born of a part monkey mother, he would have been alive from the moment of conception. Medical science has now confirmed that a human embryo is a living being long before the nostrils even form. So did God breathe the breath of life into Adam’s nostrils as a fetus? If so, was Adam not “alive” as he was developing in the womb up to that point before his nostrils developed?

Then there’s the issue of Eve. The Bible say in Genesis 2:21-22 that Eve was created by God putting Adam into a deep sleep, taking out one of his ribs and creating Eve from that rib . This has incredible spiritual significance throughout the rest of the Bible with regards to marriage, because by making woman from man, she was to Adam “bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh” (Genesis 2:23). God used the way he created Eve to establish marriage as a bond between a man and a woman who would become “one flesh”. Woman came out of man, so when a woman and man are married, “the two become one flesh”. (Genesis 2:24) Jesus even reiterates this creation account and it’s significance in Matthew 19:5 and in Mark 10:8. Now compare that to Theistic Evolution which says Eve really wasn’t created from Adam, but that instead, she was created in the womb of her part monkey mother, developed into a fetus, was born and raised by her hominid parents, then ran into Adam one day and said “hey, do your parents look as freaky as mine?”

If you believe Genesis can be interpreted to say God used evolution, then you might as well throw out the whole Bible. After all, if “man was made from the dust of the ground” can be interpreted as “man was born from part monkey parents”…or if “woman was created from man’s rib” can be interpreted as “woman grew up the child of part monkey parents”…or if “God breathed into man’s nostrils the breath of life and he became a living being” can be interpreted as “man was already a living being before he even developed embryonic nostrils to breath into”…then why believe anything the Bible has to say at all? Why take anything Moses said seriously? Or David? Or Solomon? Or Paul? Or Jesus? If interpretation of Scripture can be twisted that far from what it really says, you can twist anything in the Bible to say whatever you want it to. Maybe we should just trust what God told us instead of trying to twist Scripture to fit what we think science tells us.

As we have seen, these objections are resolved with the GAE. Adam and Eve could have been created de novo, without parents, without contradicting what Scripture says, even if we interpret it very literally.

I’m encouraged to hear that Dutko read the GAE with interest and an open mind. I am not expecting a debate, a conversation where we might understand each other better. I hope that the understanding I presented in the GAE would work for him. Perhaps he might remain a YEC, but also, perhaps, he might see this version of TE as unobjectionable.


I think Dutko makes a good Biblical argument. I also believe he seriously hurts his cause when he wraps up with this.

It’s also important to remember that the scientific evidence for Creation over Evolution is overwhelming when presented with all the facts, and those facts are available in the [Top Ten Proofs Evolution is Scientifically Impossible] – 2CD Set.

In my opinion, he damages his credibility significantly by making irresponsible statements, and offering support for those statements only if you purchase them.


Ken Wolgemuth and @davidson have some experience with him. I’m told he is solidly YEC, so that rhetoric isn’t so surprising.

They key point is that I can grant him all of his biblical case, and still make space for him with the GAE. It will be really interesting to see how he responds to this. Will he be open to this? Will he make space for me? I’m honestly curious to see how this goes.

1 Like

Oh, I agree! It will be very interesting to see how this turns out.


So you are going to convince listeners that evolutionary science is neutral on the question of whether God exists or not?

1 Like

I expect Dutko to take issue with GAE on A&E not being our sole progenitors, which he will likely argue is required from a straight forward reading of Genesis.

1 Like

Perhaps. But I present a straight forward reading of Genesis too. Perhaps he will disagree, but on what grounds?

Also, sole-genealogical progenitors is just fine. It is sole-genetic progenitors that is a problem.

So - I am just projecting what I think his position will be. I expect he will argue that the Bible requires that A&E were the only people in existence at the time of their creation, with no others around for their offspring to interbreed with.


Alright, conversation is done. Were any of you able to listen? What do you make of it?

I listened to the entire live broadcast. I came away with the impression that Dutko was somewhat apologetic for having monopolized the discussion. Perhaps he realized that he never allowed you sufficient opportunity to explain to the audience why you wrote the book nor summarize its major points.

Dutko seemed like a polite and likable fellow. Nevertheless, he demonstrated very little grasp of the book and seemed confused about what you were trying to explain to him.


True. I think there was enough there to expose his audience to the ideas, and pique their curiosity. I’d go back on that show.

1 Like

Is there a recording somewhere?


I will be posting it when I get it, perhaps end of the week.


Dutko’s aforementioned “Top Ten Proofs” series includes “Evidence Dinosaurs Lived With Humans”, a very interesting read. An excerpt:

First, dinosaurs were nothing more than reptiles that continued to grow in size. Most people are unaware of the fact that reptiles never stop growing in size while alive. As humans, we know that our noses and ears never stop growing, but the rest of us does. Same with mammals and most of the animal kingdom. They grow to a certain size, then stop growing. While they do get older, they don’t get any bigger. This is not true, however, with reptiles, as reptiles continue to grow in size until the day they die. That’s why when you see a tortoise that has lived for 100+ years, it gets to be the size of a bathtub. If a tortoise could live for 500 years, it would literally grow to be the size of a garage and would be considered nothing more than one of the many unique types of dinosaur.

I can see why Dutko probably appeals to many Ken Ham fans.