Did Adam and Eve have bellybuttons?

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
a reply to: DpatC

No offense, but how do you expect anyone to answer this?

Catechism. This is the type of question people asked in Catechism. It's along the lines of "Can God create an object so massive not even He can move it?" and "Could Jesus microwave a burrito so hot that it's impossible for Him to eat it before it cools down?" The attempt to ask a ponderous and unanswerable question to throw off the Catechism instructor.

The answer, obviously, is 'no.' Bellybuttons are essentially scar tissue. God created mankind perfect in His own image, so they were created without scars.

So...
Why the foreskin?

And who circumcised God?

a reply to: burdman30ott6

Frozen burritos are highly volatile and would explode before reaching that point

a reply to: the owlbear

Initially mankind wasn't created to wear clothing. Would you want the Roman war helmet unprotected while walking around? Once clothing was a thing (and once clothing that wasn't as rough as steel wool became a thing), the foreskin became a hygiene issue. Imagine living in the dessert as a nomad, sweat, sand, actual bathing a rarity...

a reply to: DpatC


Belly buttons are the devils lint collector!

originally posted by: the owlbear

originally posted by: dug88
a reply to: DpatC

I dunno i guess the first question to ask would be...does god have a uterus and were adam and eve attaches to god's uterus with an umbilical chord?

I once posited "Does (or did) God have a foreskin?" And why create something "in your image" and demand it chops away at its body as a covenant? And why being omniscient and knowing the beginning and the end be so hung up on a little bit of skin on a penis?

Ya...seems pretty #ing stupid. Im just glad i was never mutilated.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

the foreskin became a hygiene issue. Imagine living in the dessert as a nomad, sweat, sand, actual bathing a rarity...

I really didn't need that image. What a strange person you are....

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha

What came first, the belly or the button?

Whut happened wuz, God started to doubt his own existence because of Man’s philosophical questions that tackle paradox and he decided to make Buddha’s belly heavier than He Himself could lift.

Having achieved that He then gave Buddha a bellybutton which then made it just light enough for him to lift.

God then concluded that He Himself did exist and he made photons both particle and wave when he made the first cat—Schrodinger was his name—to easily handle the paradox therein.

It’s The Grand Unified Theory…hence my name.

a reply to: The GUT

Now how does God keep his El Monteray frozen chimichangas from exploding?

NarcolepticBuddha

she divorced Frasier.

great legs tho.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: The GUT

Now how does God keep his El Monteray frozen chimichangas from exploding?

Background Microwave radiation.

One doesn't just put their chimichanga into a pulsar.

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: The GUT

Now how does God keep his El Monteray frozen chimichangas from exploding?

That's silly!
God doesn't eat chimichangas !

I did hear that he once ate a bean burrito .
That was right before the big bang

originally posted by: burgerbuddy
NarcolepticBuddha

she divorced Frasier.

great legs tho.

Bebe Neuwirth mmm

a reply to: burdman30ott6

But even your answer isn't provable because you're going by Biblical ideas. Islamic teachings say God didn't create anything in His image. The point I'm making is that both of our answers simply rely on the religious teachings we personally accept, even though there's literally no way we could prove that either set of teachings is correct or incorrect.

Even if some floating creature brought out a human male, claimed it was Adam, and then showed off his belly, would we consider that proof? How would we verify that the male flashing his belly was the same "Adam" from our religious stories?

a reply to: DpatC

Sadly, it's a moot question.

The bible can't be trusted as an historical source, and the primitives of the day didn't have the intellectual fortitude to ask those kinds of questions, let alone understand basic human biology.

All the bible has is fallible supposition.

I thought ATS was all about intellectual integrity, healthy scepticism, and striving for rational and logical conclusions, if a conclusion can be reached at all.

Some of you speak as if the god debate has already been settled in favour of theists...news flash, it hasn't.

When something is based on insufficient evidence, and requires faith alone... you've not even crawled out of the stage of hypothesis (and calling it an hypothesis is being generous).

originally posted by: TheLotLizard
a reply to: DpatC

Mitochondrial evidence shows we have evidence that everyone shares a common woman ancestor from around 200k years ago (EVE)

Added to that all men share one common ancestor from around 130k years ago. (ADAM)

I would bet they have belly buttons.

Not everyone. Seems there were two sets of Adam and Eve. As pointed out the original Adam and Eve are 200,000 years old. There is a sub race of Adam and eve that are only 30,000 old. You know the ones I talk about, they claim to be the rightful owners of this world. Its just one big family..

a reply to: enlightenedservant

Thus why it is called "faith," friend.

a reply to: burdman30ott6

If it helps, even the ancient meta-human hybrid origin conspiracy theorists like myself think that our ancestors believed in God. Even our gods believed in God.

Its God that we can claim faith to that gives us the right to exist as a sentient free species.

If he made them, and they made us, then he made us all.

Our purpose is our own. Our ancestors paid their dues so we could be free and exist in happiness.

Without that faith in God we would still be slaves.

In many myths throughout history there is always a hidden hand or force that preserved the abomination that we were and makes us worthy as "Gods" children" as we are. We are natural in his eyes. God sees his creation in us.

Someone out there loves the crap out of us.

Adam then Eve were 'created' from clay (Adam/Man) & then Eve was fashioned from the rib-of-man into a 'recepticle=holy Grail')....so neither was born with an umbilicle cord which provided nutrients and-or Stem Cells to the embryo/fetus/zygot

of course another source for blood oxygen, nutrients. stem cells needed to be provided to infuse the developing zygot (if indeed both Adam & Eve were to become the model/protypes for all future generations of Humans)

inedeed,'God' must have taken 42 Weeks to make Adam out of Clay & Eve also 42 Weeks to be fashioned out of the man's rib as the base-line... as that is the general Gestation period to achieve a live & fully develoed birth of a human...





has anyone considered that 42 'weeks' are ordained to create a next-generation baby (and likely both Adam then Eve at 42 weeks each)

BUT that the end-times/Eschatology reveals that 42 'months' are set aside for the times of the Tribulation
then followed by another 42 'Months' for the Great Tribulation period

(42 weeks for developing man < but 42 months for developing the final cosmic battle between good-vs-evil...)


~~ collaborating explanation:

People also ask
How many weeks is a human pregnancy?

The human gestation period is approximately 38 weeks from conception. The World Health Organization gives pregnancy as normal when it is from 37 to 42 weeks.

all youse 'Faith' & 'Believers' need to develop more 'reason' & science logic to creation than there is now, as exhibited in this thread....

a reply to: ooder57
I agree with most of your points.

However, no matter how unreliable the Bible is, I don't think we should completely dismiss it. Without the Bible, we may not have the clue where to begin with. For Example, without references from the bible, we may not know the hidden tomb claimed to be the tomb of Jesus of Nazareth.

I agree there are all hypothesis. But it was this hyphotesis that lead to Galileo's finding, even if scientific fact do not favor church's doctrine.

Who knows by questioning and hypothesising things like Adam's belly button, we may find some breakthrough which the bible miss.

Sometime discoveries can be found based on crazy ideas.