According to evolution, the first man on the planet had to have a navel --- no ifs, ands, or buttons about it.
But according to Genesis 1, the first man on the planet did not require one;
So what? This is all getting pretty silly. Your argument was that if, according to the ToE, the first humans had navels then:-
Evolution is Omphalos, in that the first man and woman would have belly buttons.
Whereas the Adam and Eve of the Bible would not, and that fact would be a testimony to their progeny.
But, as I've pointed out before, this is not the case at all. In fact I asked you to read it up, as you clearly don't understand the hypothesis. Allow me to refresh your memory:-
The
Omphalos hypothesis was named after the title of an 1857 book, Omphalos by Philip Henry Gosse, in which Gosse argued that in order for the world to be "functional", God must have created the Earth with mountains and canyons, trees with growth rings, Adam and Eve with hair, fingernails, and navels (omphalos is Greek for "navel"), and that therefore no evidence that we can see of the presumed age of the earth and universe can be taken as reliable. The idea has seen some revival in the twentieth century by some modern creationists, who have extended the argument to light that appears to originate in far-off stars and galaxies (although other creationists reject this explanation).
Omphalos is a young earth creationist hypothesis and has nothing to do with evolution where there is
no need for things to appear any other age that what they are. Thus the fact that Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam both had navels does not mean they were at a different development age than that of their appearance. For some young earth creationists (before Ken Ham), there was a need to counteract early estimates of the Earth's age, because it was thought a functioning earth with seas, mountains, canyons and flowing water would take time to form. So, according to the hypothesis, God created everything in a working state that had the appearance of age without being actually old, including the provision of Adam and Eve's navels, even though they were created as adults.
...and, in fact, sound doctrine teaches he did not.
Let me repeat, Omphalos is without doubt a creationist invention, but it is no longer accepted by 'main stream' YECsts, who have invented other fancy excuses for explaining the structure of the Earth and the measured age of the universe being massively longer that their genealogical date of 6,000 years or so. Thus according to
Answers in Genesis:-
When God created Adam and Eve in mature form, the day they were created they might have appeared to be, say, 30 years old. But God wouldn't want or need to create the appearance of a false history, any more than the mature trees created by God would have had growth rings initially. Those are things which would develop in their offspring as a result of processes later on.
So YECists these days claim that Adam and Eve had no navels and that trees were created without rings, but absolute tree-ring chronology for extant and fossil trees can be traced back nearly 13,000 years - twice the age of the YECist universe! Very unsound doctrine indeed!
