Did Adam and Eve have a belly button?

[Mike Elphick]

Oh, come on AV, we've been over this before when I joined CF . We all know you have a sort of thingy about "maturity without history" (a variation of embedded ageism), so you don't have an issue with it because you have convinced yourself .

No, he didn't write a book about it.

Sorry, you've misunderstood me. The fist paragraph is about YOU, not Gosse.

I'm not the first to identified the problem. It was Phillip Henry Gosse who wrote a book about it: that was in 1857, a couple of years before Darwin's On the Origin of Species. Gosse was a devout Christian and a creationist, and expected his book to be well received, but it wasn't because the Christian community could not accept that God could be so deceptive (actually, Gosse never implied this in his book).

Ever since, the problem of creation of a mature world that obviously has a history has been brushed under the carpet by creationists. But as I see it, it is still an unresolved problem for young Earth creationists.

Gosse wrote about Omphalism, which is maturity with history.

I too disagree with Gosse.

The second and third paragraphs are about Gosse and embedded age with history.

 

[Mike Elphick]

So there what????

U have not explained how it effects any one's life except by saying it hurts your feelings. Sorry about your feelings but that is not th point here.

You are quite right to say that my feelings are not the issue here, but you really ought to re-read my post before jumping to conclusions about me personally. In fact I explained how the pseudoscience of young Earth creationism has the potential to affect all our lives.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sorry, you've misunderstood me. The fist paragraph is about YOU, not Gosse.

I know that.

I'm pointing out where Gosse and I clearly disagree.

I don't even know why you brought him up.

The second and third paragraphs are about Gosse and embedded age with history.

Gosse didn't believe in embedded age, he believed in Omphalism.

Once again:

• Embedded Age = maturity without history
• Omphalism = maturity with history

Here's then, what you're saying, in effect:

The second and third paragraphs are about Gosse and maturity without history with history.

... which doesn't make sense.

You're trying too hard to pin Omphalism on me, and it's making you look bad.

 

[IndieVisible]

You are quite right to say that my feelings are not the issue here, but you really ought to re-read my post before jumping to conclusions about me personally. In fact I explained how the pseudoscience of young Earth creationism has the potential to affect all our lives.

I don't believe either way has effected my life or the life of any one I know, and you have yet to explain how it would.

 

[AV1611VET]

I don't believe either way has effected my life or the life of any one I know, and you have yet to explain how it would.

Ask him if young earth creationism 'has the potential to affect all our lives', does old earth creationism do the opposite?

 

[brinny]

Nah, i don't think they did.

 

[Mike Elphick]

I don't believe either way has effected my life or the life of any one I know, and you have yet to explain how it would.

Just Google the dangers of creationism and you will find plenty of explanations. I provide below two quotes from the first Google page:-

Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species through natural selection, was for a long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon. Today creationist ideas are tending to find their way into Europe and their spread is affecting quite a few Council of Europe member states.

The prime target of present-day creationists, most of whom are of the Christian or Muslim faith, is education. Creationists are bent on ensuring that their ideas are included in the school science syllabuses. Creationism cannot, however, lay claim to being a scientific discipline.

Creationists question the scientific character of certain areas of knowledge and argue that the theory of evolution is only one interpretation among others. They accuse scientists of not providing enough evidence to establish the theory of evolution as scientifically valid. On the contrary, creationists defend their own statements as scientific. None of this stands up to objective analysis.

We are witnessing a growth of modes of thought which challenge established knowledge about nature, evolution, our origins and our place in the universe.

There is a real risk of serious confusion being introduced into our children’s minds between what has to do with convictions, beliefs, ideals of all sorts and what has to do with science. An “all things are equal” attitude may seem appealing and tolerant, but is in fact dangerous.

<...>

Creationism claims to be based on scientific rigour. In reality the methods employed by creationists are of three types: purely dogmatic assertions; distorted use of scientific quotations, sometimes illustrated with magnificent photographs; and backing from more or less well-known scientists, most of whom are not specialists in these matters. By these means creationists seek to appeal to non-specialists and spread doubt and confusion in their minds.
The dangers of creationism in education

Science is not about faith. It's not about beliefs. It's about thinking and examining and experimenting. Dangers erupt when faith is confused for science. Even Einstein himself fell prey to this when he refused to accept some of the basic tenets of quantum physics, a new science at the time when he helped discover it, claiming that "God does not play dice." Another prominent physicist, Niels Bohr, responded cleverly by saying "Quit telling God what to do!" The Dangers Of Creationism

 

[Mike Elphick]

I know that.

I'm pointing out where Gosse and I clearly disagree.

I don't even know why you brought him up.

Gosse didn't believe in embedded age, he believed in Omphalism.

Once again:

• Embedded Age = maturity without history
• Omphalism = maturity with history

Here's then, what you're saying, in effect:

The second and third paragraphs are about Gosse and maturity without history with history.

... which doesn't make sense.

It doesn't make sense, because that's not what I actually wrote. Are you sure it's not you who's trying too hard? .

I know you like to distance yourself from Gosse, whom you would have seen escorted out of your church, apparently.

I, and others, brought the subject up because it is highly relevant to the topic.

 

[AV1611VET]

Just Google the dangers of creationism and you will find plenty of explanations. I provide below two quotes from the first Google page:-

Creationism, born of the denial of the evolution of species through natural selection, was for a long time an almost exclusively American phenomenon.

Whoever said this wasn't familiar with Judaism or Islam, was he?

 

[Jazer]

Nah, i don't think they did.

So how do you explain the DNA science that tells us that people have been around a lot longer then 6,000 years?

 

[brinny]

Did Adam and Eve have a belly button?

Originally Posted by brinny
Nah, i don't think they did.

So how do you explain the DNA science that tells us that people have been around a lot longer then 6,000 years?

Not following you.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, he didn't write a book about it.

Gosse wrote about Omphalism, which is maturity with history.

I too disagree with Gosse.

That is exactly what you are arguing for.

 

[Skaloop]

Nah, i don't think they did.

So are belly buttons (or even scars in general) a result of sin that only came about after the fall?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Nah, i don't think they did.

So are belly buttons (or even scars in general) a result of sin that only came about after the fall?

if a female did not give birth to either of them, why would either of them have belly buttons? Whose umbilical cord would they have been attached to?

 

[AV1611VET]

So are belly buttons (or even scars in general) a result of sin that only came about after the fall?

Yes -- Eve had no children prior to the Fall.

 

[Loudmouth]

You're trying too hard to pin Omphalism on me, and it's making you look bad.

Denying the obvious is making you look bad.

Radiohalos are the bellybutton of the geologic world.

"Radiohalos or pleochroic halos are microscopic, spherical shells of discolouration within minerals such as biotite that occur in granite and other igneous rocks. The shells are zones of radiation damage caused by the inclusion of minute radioactive crystals within the host crystal structure."
Radiohalo - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

There are numerous halos in rocks from isotopes with very long half lives. There is simply no reason that we should ever see these radiohalos if the Earth is 6,000 years old. These halos are a direct record of the history of radioactive decay in the rock. There is no functional reason that they should be in there. You are arguing that this history was put into the rocks. You are arguing for a false history.

I could also point to galactic interactions and quasar jets that could not form in 10,000 years (much less 100,000 years) that show a history of development. I could point to instance after instance where there is a required history for something to exist. You claim that all of this history was faked by the Creator. It is identical to Gosse's theology. You are a Disciple of Gosse.

 

[Keffiyeh]

The important question is "Did they have cable TV?"

No but they had broadband...

 

[Skaloop]

if a female did not give birth to either of them, why would either of them have belly buttons? Whose umbilical cord would they have been attached to?

That does not appear to be a response to my question. But to clarify, since the belly button is a scar, and Adam and Eve didn't have them since they weren't born, what about other scars? Did Adam and Eve have any scars before the fall? If Adam tripped while walking in the Garden of Eden and cut himself on a rock, would that leave a scar?

 

[Skaloop]

Yes -- Eve had no children prior to the Fall.

So no scars of any kind before the fall? Are scars therefore the result of the sin nature of man?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
if a female did not give birth to either of them, why would either of them have belly buttons? Whose umbilical cord would they have been attached to?

That does not appear to be a response to my question. But to clarify, since the belly button is a scar, and Adam and Eve didn't have them since they weren't born, what about other scars? Did Adam and Eve have any scars before the fall? If Adam tripped while walking in the Garden of Eden and cut himself on a rock, would that leave a scar?

Not before the fall...there was no bloodshed of any kind....no accidents, no bumbling, no stumbling, no need for healing.