Well, i just read this question in a book the other day i though it was a great question.
I think that if the Genesis were to be taken literaly, than Adam would have a belly button.
What do you think?
2007-06-14 08:59:03 · 18 answers · asked by Emiliano M. 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
trebor: Can you be more specific? where in the Bible says that they did'nt have a belly button?
If God went to the trouble of creating the light of the stars that are milions of light years away "on route" so that we could see it even though the earth is only 6000 years old, then couldn't he, for stectic appeal only, create adam and eve with belly buttons? I think he would given that Adam represents all men and eve all wemen. They should be like all other men and wemen and therefore have belly buttons
2007-06-14 09:19:47 · update #1
Huh? Why? Explain your reasoning, because I come the opposite conclusion.
God rarely if ever creates something without some kind of purpose (even if it seems insignificant or is unknown to us). Also He does not lie. Per the way that Adam & Eve where created, they wouldn't have needed umbilical cords as we know them to have been created for this *purpose*: the means by which the source of life & sustanance travels to babies en utero. The source of Adam & Eve's life & sustanance was God's creative work, His direct breath & sustaining power via the Tree of Life. If that is the sole purpose of a belly button & God does not lie, He wouldn't have given them one.
That being said, if on the off chance that a belly button has another purpose that only God knows, maybe it is possible that they had one.
2007-06-14 09:21:04 · answer #1 · answered by Sakurachan 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I believe we really have an answer to that, and we can say, 'No — Adam didn't. Neither did Eve.'
Why? Because your belly-button is a sign that you were once attached to your mother. You depended on that life-line — the umbilical cord — for your nourishment from her body as you developed inside her.
But our first parents, Adam and Eve, didn't develop that way. I believe that God would not have planted on them a false indication that they had developed in a mother's womb.
2007-06-14 16:08:54 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Well, as an ID believer, I'd have to say yes. The only difference between Adam and Grug was that God breathed a soul into Adam.
2007-06-14 16:02:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If it was taken literally he would NOT have a bellybutton. A bellybutton is only the leftovers from the umbilical cord... Adam never had a mother and hence was never sustained by an umbilical cord. Logically he would not have one. Neither would Eve.
2007-06-14 16:06:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
No! And neither did Eve! Read the Bible more carefully!
Only those who follow the religions of Evolution and Secular Humanism believe they did!
2007-06-14 16:05:55 · answer #5 · answered by trebor namyl hcaeb 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Nope
2007-06-14 16:01:34 · answer #6 · answered by Julie 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Furthermore, were Adam and Eve related?
2007-06-14 16:07:22 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋
I think we will never know. The Bible doesn't give graphic details on HOW God created anything during the 7 days of creation. We'll never know if God's word for "creation" is our word for "birth."
Love God all your life so you can ask him when you die. :)
2007-06-14 16:04:31 · answer #8 · answered by SayWhat? 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Honey, there was never any Adam or Eve (they are only metaphors for a mathematical equation of our creation, think about it...x..y..."break" off the rib...)
Better quesion: why do men have nipples? (because women are the actual "blueprint" for human kind)
2007-06-14 16:03:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
I doubt it. He spent no time in utero, so there was no need for an umbilical cord without an umbilical cord there is no umbilicus.
2007-06-14 16:03:33 · answer #10 · answered by Me 4 · 4⤊ 0⤋