2007-02-12 13:43:52 · 21 answers · asked by TheExpert 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For those who believe the Bible to be historically accurate, this is not a trivial question. If Adam and Eve did not have navels, then they were not perfect human beings. On the other hand, if they had navels, then the navels would imply a birth they never experienced.
Bruce Felton and Mark Fowler are the authors of The Best, Worst, and Most Unusual (Galahad Books, 1994). In this entertaining reference work, they devote several paragraphs (pp. 146-147) to what they call "the wont theological dispute." They take this to be the acrimonious debate, which has been going on ever since the book of Genesis was written, over whether the first human pair had what Sir Thomas Browne, in 1646, called "that tortuosity or complicated nodosity we usually call the Navell."
Browns opinion was that Adam and Eve, because they had no parents, must have had perfectly smooth abdomens. In 1752, according to Felton and Fowler, the definitive treatise on the topic was published in Germany. It was tided Untersuchung der Frage: Ob unsere ersten Uraltern, Adam und Eve, einen Nabel gehabt (Examination on the Question: Whether Our First Ancestors, Adam and Eve, Possessed a Navel). After discussing all sides of this difficult question, the author, Dr. Christian Tobias Ephraim Reinhard, finally concluded that the famous pair were navelless.
2007-02-12 14:54:58 · answer #1 · answered by Freedom 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no way to know for sure but if you believe in creation then (which i assume you do since you asked about Adam and Eve) they would not have a belly button. Since belly buttons are where a fetus connects with the mother and Adam and Eve never inside the womb
2007-02-12 21:49:22 · answer #2 · answered by roy_g_biv_83 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Adam and Eve never existed, if they did then they would have had belly buttons.
2007-02-12 21:50:35 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Some think so.
Did the trees in the Garden of Eden have rings?
Did the light from distant stars appear in the sky?
No, I don't think they had belly buttons.
And I don't think the trees (fully mature at creation) had rings.
And I DO think starlight from distant stars was visible because light only slows near gravity, traveling through the expanse of space is instantaneous.
.
2007-02-12 21:48:02 · answer #4 · answered by s2scrm 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Belly-buttons would've been obsolete on them. Common sense says "no", but who knows.
2007-02-12 21:47:29 · answer #5 · answered by Loathe thy neighbor. 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
For the correct answer i think you will have to wait ti'll the second resurrection and ask them. Or you can do what is right and go to heaven and ask them there. Not Kidding.
2007-02-12 21:49:28 · answer #6 · answered by Peluche22 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Always a classic, and I always love it......: )
Nope. God hand crafted the belly-button system only for the second generationers and there after....
ridiculous creationism is, really./
2007-02-12 21:46:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
They can be amoebas if you want due to the fact that the story of Genesis is a myth
2007-02-12 21:50:49 · answer #8 · answered by FAUUFDDaa 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes of course. God says He created man in his image.
Not in the image of God, but in the image you see man today.
2007-02-12 21:48:45 · answer #9 · answered by byefareed 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The umbilical cord is to feed with while your in your mothers belly.
Since they where never there I would say no.
2007-02-12 21:47:03 · answer #10 · answered by Joel C 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋