Did Adam and Eve Have Belly Buttons?

Question

No answers from all you athiests please...lol : )

Answer 1

It really doesn't matter but when i get to heaven I'll be sure to ask God.

Answer 2

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.

Answer 3

I'm a christian and an evolutionist, so i don't think the Genesis's first chapters are literal. Still if i had to Guess i'd say Adam and Eve both had belly buttons. I mean if God went to the trouble of creating the light of the stars wich are milions and milhions of light years away in the middle of the way only we could see it, it'd seem only logical to think he'd give that specific mark of every human being to the first couple of human beings.

Some time ago i asked the same question, few people, if any, agreed with me

Answer 4

According to some young-earth creationists, they had bellybuttons but not appendices and wisdom teeth and other things that cause unnecessary pain and suffering.

Asking this question is a bit like asking whether Noah took enough fresh water for everyone and everything on the ark (the weight of the water would have prevented the ship from floating). Such questions take the stories in a factual manner that ignores the clues in Scripture itself that suggest other ways of reading it.

The main character in the creation stories is not called "Adam" as though that were a name in Hebrew. He is called "Adam" which is the Hebrew word for "human". And so if we wanted to translate Genesis properly, we'd call the main character in Genesis 2-3 "Human". I wonder whether many people would be inclined to take the story differently than they do now if it were translated in this more accurate way.

Adam means human being, and Adam in the story is a symbol of what each and every one of us is like. And since we have bellybuttons, there is a real sense in which it is possible to answer "yes"!

Answer 5

No belly buttons.

Maybe long umbilical chords attached to the Tree of Life?

Answer 6

It was unnecessary.
The belly-button was given to serve as a lint trap.
Adam and Eve were naked.

Answer 7

The world may never know.

Answer 8

well...wow this is a good question lol. i suppose not since the bible says that they were made, not born....maybe god put them there to make them feel better about being made from dirt?

Answer 9

I'm pretty sure they wouldn't, since they weren't "born" in the literal sense.
Check out the link below.

Answer 10

No they did not.
Since God created them and they were not carried in a womb they would have no umbilical cords