Did adam and eve have belly buttons?

did adam and eve have bellie buttons?

Agreed. They probably didn't have baby teeth, puberty, or acne either...

I would believe so since they were human beings...

ok, so I checked it out, people say they dont because your belly-button (navel), or tummy-button as it's sometimes called, 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. So since they were not developed inside of a mothers womb, it is believed that they did not have any.

Not addressed - they were made in His image - not important.

First of all, if Adam and Eve isa true story than we are all related and I guess genetics made some of us white and some black, many didfferent accents and we scattered across the world. We kill and make love to our brothers and sisters, and our children are not deformed even though if you do have a baby with your family it is said it will be deformed. Also, it is a sin so I suppose we will never be rid of sin?

well I'd say no since neither had an embilical cord.

Well, let's see. The bible was written by man and the bible is a book of stories. Explanations and fairy tales described in terms so that humans could attempt to understand the true power of God. The pictures of Jesus are only what we imagine he would look like. There are no recorded true photographs of Jesus. None that have been proven authentic. The story says Adam was created from the dust in His image and then He took a rib from Adam to complete creating Eve. Today, men and women both have 12 ribs and we were not created from dust, rather we grew inside a woman. I don't think Adam and Eve are real, I believe they are symbolic in describing the awesomeness of God. It doesn't matter if they had belly buttons or not. If they didn't, doesn't that mean they hatched from eggs. Don't spend so much time trying to figure out if they had belly buttons, instead try imagining an all powerful being creating a living human being with the "swoop of a hand". Pretty powerful.

THE BIBLICAL CREATION story in the Bible has been interpreted to mean that the First Act was that of CREATIO EX NIHILO, "creation out of nothing". However, by the time had reached Day 6, His Lordship had a worldful of created stuff to work with; and so He created them .. Homosapiens sapiens .. by adjusting the DNA of their humble Homosapiens Mom and Dad using some precious chemical taken from the earth. So, OF COURSE, the emerging new humans, ADAM AND EVE, HAD BELLY BUTTONS.

??? ok I understand the last six words but I'm confused on the rest. . . Would someone say that in English please. . .

Wow.

You to huh. . .

Yea, that was interesting. No, actually, is wasn't. It was hard to follow and I didn't understand it at all.

That actually sounds Mormonish. . . .

Thks for reading. pls allow me to explain by quoting:

THE BIBLICAL CREATION story in the Bible has been interpreted to mean that the First Act was that of CREATIO EX NIHILO, 'creation out of nothing'.
MEANING: (1) According to the Bible, In the beginning G-d created the heavens and the earth [THERE HAD BEEN NOTHING BEFORE].

However, by the time had reached Day 6, His Lordship had a worldful of created stuff to work with;
MEANING: (2) The six steps ("Days" outlining the Creation of the universe parallels strictly the course of evolution on this planet.,

and so He created them .. Homosapiens sapiens .. by adjusting the DNA of their humble Homosapiens Mom and Dad
MEANING: (3) Homosapiens [two words, H=human being in greek; sapiens=wise, knowing in latin] is the scientific name for our nearest (now extinct) ancestors; Homosapiens sapiens is the full classification of our present-day humans. [Our now disappeared cousins, the Neanderthals, are classified as Homosapiens neanderthalensis.]

using some precious chemical taken from the earth.
MEANING: (4) (a) satisfies the biochemical need for a catalyst to the major DNA alteration that resulted in Adam and Eve. (b) satisfies the biblical use of the dust of the earth as an essential element [pun intended] in the final exhausting production of divine mirror creativity, namely mankind.

... I hope now it makes sense.

From an imbilical cord dec94 Adam was created from the Dust of the Earth just like it says in the Bible so He was not Born of a woman Eve was Molded from Adams Flesh so she was not born of Woman either.
And Mhung. . . Days are 24 hour days not Ages
The Bible teaches that God created a paradise. Adam and Eve soon corrupted paradise with sin. Death was the penalty. As a result, sin, suffering, and death came upon Adam and upon all the world he ruled (Romans 5:12-17). The first bloodshed took place when God killed animals to provide a skin covering for Adam and Eve. This was symbolic of His plan to later die as a sin offering Himself, in the person of Jesus Christ, to cover our sins forever and conquer death forever.

The Bible teaches that God will ultimately restore paradise (the New Heavens and New Earth). There will be no more death and no more tears. Lambs will once again lie down in peace with lions.

However, if the billions-of-years scenarios were true, then death, disease, and suffering would be nothing new or special resulting from Adam and Eve's sin. They would be merely the natural order of things since the beginning of time. In other words, most of our natural world's relatively miserable present-day condition would not have truly resulted from events subsequent to Adam's sin. Disease, death, and tragedy would have been designed into the natural order of things from the start.
When God said he Created man from the Dust of the Earth I'm sure that's exactly what he meant.

What does the Bible tell us about the meaning of ‘day’ in Genesis 1? A word can have more than one meaning, depending on the context. For instance, the English word ‘day’ can have perhaps 14 different meanings. For example, consider the following sentence: ‘Back in my father’s day, it took ten days to drive across the Australian Outback during the day.’ Here the first occurrence of ‘day’ means ‘time’ in a general sense. The second ‘day,’ where a number is used, refers to an ordinary day, and the third refers to the daylight period of the 24-hour period. The point is that words can have more than one meaning, depending on the context.

To understand the meaning of ‘day’ in Genesis 1, we need to determine how the Hebrew word for ‘day,’ yom, is used in the context of Scripture. Consider the following:

A typical concordance will illustrate that yom can have a range of meanings: a period of light as contrasted to night, a 24-hour period, time, a specific point of time, or a year.

A classical, well-respected Hebrew-English lexicon8 (a one-way dictionary) has seven headings and many subheadings for the meaning of yom—but defines the creation days of Genesis 1 as ordinary days under the heading ‘day as defined by evening and morning.’

A number, and the phrase ‘evening and morning,’ are used for each of the six days of creation (Genesis 1:5,8,13,19,23,31).

Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with a number 410 times, and each time it means an ordinary day9—why would Genesis 1 be the exception?10

Outside Genesis 1, yom is used with the word ‘evening’ or ‘morning’11 23 times. ‘Evening’ and ‘morning’ appear in association, but without yom, 38 times. All 61 times the text refers to an ordinary day—why would Genesis 1 be the exception?12

In Genesis 1:5, yom occurs in context with the word ‘night.’ Outside of Genesis 1, ‘night’ is used with yom 53 times—and each time it means an ordinary day. Why would Genesis 1 be the exception? Even the usage of the word ‘light’ with yom in this passage determines the meaning as ordinary day.13

The plural of yom, which does not appear in Genesis 1, can be used to communicate a longer time period, e.g. ‘in those days.’14 Adding a number here would be nonsensical. Clearly, in Exodus 20:11 where a number is used with days, it unambiguously refers to six Earth-rotation days.

There are words in biblical Hebrew (such as olam or qedem) that are very suitable for communicating long periods of time, or indefinite time, but none of these words are used in Genesis 1.15 Alternatively, the days or years could have been compared with grains of sand if long periods were meant.

Dr James Barr (Regius Professor of Hebrew at Oxford University), who himself does not believe Genesis is true history, nonetheless admitted as far as the language of Genesis 1 is concerned that:

‘ … so far as I know, there is no professor of Hebrew or Old Testament at any world-class university who does not believe that the writer(s) of Gen. 1–11 intended to convey to their readers the ideas that (a) creation took place in a series of six days which were the same as the days of 24 hours we now experience (b) the figures contained in the Genesis genealogies provided by simple addition a chronology from the beginning of the world up to later stages in the biblical story (c) Noah’s Flood was understood to be world-wide and extinguish all human and animal life except for those in the ark.’16

In like manner, nineteenth century liberal Professor Marcus Dods, New College, Edinburgh, said:

‘ … if, for example, the word “day” in these chapters does not mean a period of twenty-four hours, the interpretation of Scripture is hopeless.’17

Conclusion
If we are prepared to let the words of the language speak to us in accord with the context and normal definitions, without being influenced by outside ideas, then the word for ‘day’ in Genesis 1—which is qualified by a number, the phrase ‘evening and morning,’ and for day one the words ‘light and darkness’—obviously means an ordinary day (about 24 hours).

In Martin Luther’s day, some of the church fathers were saying that God created everything in only one day, or in an instant. Martin Luther wrote:

‘When Moses writes that God created Heaven and Earth and whatever is in them in six days, then let this period continue to have been six days, and do not venture to devise any comment according to which six days were one day. But, if you cannot understand how this could have been done in six days, then grant the Holy Spirit the honor of being more learned than you are. For you are to deal with Scripture in such a way that you bear in mind that God Himself says what is written. But since God is speaking, it is not fitting for you wantonly to turn His Word in the direction you wish to go.’18

Similarly, John Calvin stated: ‘ … albeit the duration of the world, now declining to its ultimate end, has not yet attained six thousand years … God’s work was completed not in a moment but in six days.’19

Luther and Calvin were the backbone of the Protestant Reformation that called the Church back to Scripture—Sola Scriptura (Scripture alone). Both of these men were adamant that Genesis 1 taught six ordinary days of creation—only thousands of years ago.

Why six days?
Exodus 31:12 says that God commanded Moses to say to the Children of Israel:

‘Six days may work be done, but on the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord. Whoever does any work in the Sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. 16Therefore the sons of Israel shall keep the Sabbath, to observe the Sabbath throughout their generations, for an everlasting covenant. 17It is a sign between Me and the sons of Israel forever. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, and on the seventh day He rested, and was refreshed.’ (Ex. 31:15–17)

‘Then God gave Moses two tablets of stone upon which were written the commandments of God, written by the finger of God.’ (Ex. 31:18)

Because God is infinite in power, and wisdom, there’s no doubt He could have created the universe and its contents in no time at all, or six seconds, or six minutes, or six hours—after all, ‘with God nothing shall be impossible’ (Luke 1:37).

However, the question to ask is, ‘Why did God take so long? Why as long as six days?’ The answer is also given in Exodus 20:11, and that answer is the basis of the fourth commandment:

‘For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day, and sanctified it.’

The seven-day week has no basis outside of Scripture. In this Old Testament passage, God commands His people, Israel, to work for six days and rest for one—that is why He deliberately took as long as six days to create everything. He set the example for man. Our week is patterned after this principle. Now if He created everything in six thousand, or six million years, followed by a rest of one thousand or one million years, then we would have a very interesting week indeed!

Some say that Exodus 20:11 is only an analogy in the sense that man is to work and rest—not that it was to mean six literal ordinary days followed by one literal ordinary day. However, Bible scholars have shown that this commandment ‘does not use analogy or archetypal thinking but that its emphasis is “stated in terms of the imitation of God or a divine precedent that is to be followed.”’20 In other words, it was to be six literal days of work, followed by one literal day of rest, just as God worked for six literal days and rested for one.

Some have argued that ‘the heavens and the earth’ is just Earth and perhaps the solar system, not the whole universe. However, this verse clearly says that God made everything in six days—six consecutive ordinary days, just like the commandment in the previous verse to work for six consecutive, ordinary days.

The phrase ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in Scripture is an example of a figure of speech called a merism, where two opposites are combined into an all-encompassing single concept, in this case the totality of creation. A linguistic analysis of the words ‘heaven(s) and earth’ in Scripture shows that they refer to the totality of all creation (the Hebrews did not have a word for ‘universe’). For example, in Genesis 14:19 God is called ‘Creator of heaven and earth.’ In Jeremiah 23:24 God speaks of himself as filling ‘heaven and earth.’ See also Gen. 14:22, 2 Kings 19:15, 2 Chron. 2:12, Ps. 115:15, 121:2, 124:8, 134:3, 146:6, Is. 37:16.

Thus there is no scriptural warrant for restricting Ex. 20:11 to the earth and its atmosphere, or the solar system alone. So Ex. 20:11 does show that the whole universe was created in six ordinary days.

Implication
As the days of creation are ordinary days in length, then by adding up the years in Scripture (assuming no gaps in the genealogies21) the age of the universe is only about six thousand years.22

That would Make the Homosapian Mom and Dad a pile of Dirt and God.

Um, WOW!

Exactly who's interpretation was this?

How about we just read the Bible and believe it for what it says? It's the word of God, He wouldn't lie to you, skew the facts, or tell you a story without clueing you in that it's only a story (Jesus told stories, he made it known.) Doing any of this would make Him a hipocrite and not much of a god.

Monica, the Bible is literal, and Adam and Eve were real, created out of dust and a rib. True, we have all our ribs and are not made from dust, but if not embalmed we do become dust, and only Adam would be missing a rib, if someone has their arm amputated it doesn't meen that their future children will be missing an arm.

Mhung, I have know idea how anyone can read the Bible (and only the Bible) and interperate what you've said. It seems like you are trying to fit evolution "science" and the Bible to be right at the same time. Fact is, evolution cannot be proven and, I beleive, is absolutly false. True science (knowledge aquired through observation, no-one's observed an animal produce ofspring unlike it's kind) fits with the Bible just fine, no need to "interperate" anything into it.

Now, the original question. Adam and Eve may not have had belly buttons, as they did not need them having not been born. Although, God may have decided to put them there anyways. So the answer is always up to debate, but if forced to answer I would say no because it's more of a scar as a result of birth than a body part.

Hey a new Guy. . . I like him already. . . . Oh I quoted Ken Ham.

...another literalist?

*sigh*

Actually it is called a Young Earth Creationist.

...or 'yyyeck' for short?

I have not had the time to read the more lengthy replies to my comments .. but from what I read it appears that Rhertorical Raving and Unwavering Fundmentalism are the rule of the day.
C'est dommage.