Did Adam and Eve have a belly button?

[Mike Elphick]

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

It is true that those brought up within an Abrahamic religion would have been creationists — that is until the age of the Earth was estimated. True also that the article I quoted does not define what a "creationist" might be! They spell it out in more detail here, about one-third down the page.

It's clearly addressing the issue of young Earth creationism, part-invented by Henry Morris.

 

[AV1611VET]

Radiohalos are the bellybutton of the geologic world.

I'm familiar with radiohalos:

Nope --- I've mention radiohalos.

Let's see you refute me.

(And yes, I saw where Polomium allegedly stems from Radon; and I'm prepared to argue that the existence of Polomium does not guarantee that Uranium, Thorium, and Radon were present. Especially on a planet where a super race of beings could have been doing experiments; or God, Himself could have embedded Polomium into biotite.)

 

[AV1611VET]

So no scars of any kind before the fall?

Correct

Are scars therefore the result of the sin nature of man?

Yes

 

[Loudmouth]

I'm familiar with radiohalos:

Then you know that you are proposing a false history embedded into the Earth.

 

[AV1611VET]

Then you know that you are proposing a false history embedded into the Earth.

No, I'm not -- you might want to read the post I copied.

And for the record, embedded age is maturity without history.

 

[LittleLambofJesus]

Originally Posted by Skaloop Are scars therefore the result of the sin nature of man?

Yes

Not to mention sores

Lazarus and the Rich Man - Here a little, there a little - Commentary

NKJV) Luke 16:21 "desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.

NKJV) Revelation 16:2 So the first went and poured out his bowl upon the earth, and a foul and loathsome sore came upon the men who had the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image.
NKJV) Revelation 16:11 They blasphemed the God of heaven because of their pains and their sores, and did not repent of their deeds.

Blue Letter Bible - Lexicon

Strong's Number G1668 matches the Greek ἕλκος (helkos), which occurs 3 times in 3 verses in the Greek concordance of the KJV

1668. helkos hel'-kos probably from 1670; an ulcer (as if drawn together):--sore.

 

[Loudmouth]

No, I'm not -- you might want to read the post I copied.

Nothing in the quote demonstrates that radiohalos from long lived isotopes are anything but direct records of uranium decay over long periods of time.

And for the record, embedded age is maturity without history.

The examples you cite are false histories, according to you. Radiohalos are the bellybuttons of rocks.

 

[Skaloop]

Yes

OK, so if scars are the result of the sin nature, and Jesus was without sin, did Jesus have a belly button?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by AV1611VET
Yes

OK, so if scars are the result of the sin nature, and Jesus was without sin, did Jesus have a belly button?

Jesus was carried by Mary, and attached to her umbilical cord. it would stand to reason that He had an umbilical cord. The bottom line is that the entire reason Jesus was sent here, born, and then died was to obliterate sin that began at the fall. Scars and belly buttons are a result of the originating sin. Jesus most likely fell, bled, scarred, like any other child growing up in human form.

Good question. How deep do you wanna go down that rabbit hole?

 

[Skaloop]

Jesus was carried by Mary, and attached to her umbilical cord. it would stand to reason that He had an umbilical cord. The bottom line is that the entire reason Jesus was sent here, born, and then died was to obliterate sin that began at the fall. Scars and belly buttons are a result of the originating sin. Jesus most likely fell, bled, scarred, like any other child growing up in human form.

Good question. How deep do you wanna go down that rabbit hole?

I'll go as far down as you wanna take me. I'm just curious as to how Jesus was subject to sin if he was without sin.

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Jesus was carried by Mary, and attached to her umbilical cord. it would stand to reason that He had an umbilical cord. The bottom line is that the entire reason Jesus was sent here, born, and then died was to obliterate sin that began at the fall. Scars and belly buttons are a result of the originating sin. Jesus most likely fell, bled, scarred, like any other child growing up in human form.

Good question. How deep do you wanna go down that rabbit hole?

I'll go as far down as you wanna take me. I'm just curious as to how Jesus was subject to sin if he was without sin.

God gave His only begotten Son to die for us, because all of humanity was now cursed, because of the fall. God, in essence came in the form of His Son (which is what Emmanuel means), and was born and lived in human form. However, Jesus was not born of man's "seed" but God's (sinlessness), but born to a human mother. Therefore He came into the earth as any human child would, and was frail, in that He would stumble, get hurt, bleed, and be in pain as any other human child would. Yet He was without sin. iT was needful that Jesus would be in this human form and be subject to death, so that He would indeed, die on the cross. He HAD to die in order to take on the sins of the world.

Being born to a human mother, means that He was born as any other human child, and his umbilical cord had to be cut like any other child's, which means he had a belly button.

 

[Skaloop]

God gave His only begotten Son to die for us, because all of humanity was now cursed, because of the fall. God, in essence came in the form of His Son (which is what Emmanuel means), and was born and lived in human form. However, Jesus was not born of man's "seed" but God's (sinlessness), but born to a human mother. Therefore He came into the earth as any human child would, and was frail, in that He would stumble, get hurt, bleed, and be in pain as any other human child would. Yet He was without sin. iT was needful that Jesus would be in this human form and be subject to death, so that He would indeed, die on the cross. He HAD to die in order to take on the sins of the world.

Being born to a human mother, means that He was born as any other human child, and his umbilical cord had to be cut like any other child's, which means he had a belly button.

So scars aren't necessitated on sin, since Jesus was without sin but had at least one scar. How then are scars a result of the fallen sin nature of man if they are not dependent on sin?

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
God gave His only begotten Son to die for us, because all of humanity was now cursed, because of the fall. God, in essence came in the form of His Son (which is what Emmanuel means), and was born and lived in human form. However, Jesus was not born of man's "seed" but God's (sinlessness), but born to a human mother. Therefore He came into the earth as any human child would, and was frail, in that He would stumble, get hurt, bleed, and be in pain as any other human child would. Yet He was without sin. iT was needful that Jesus would be in this human form and be subject to death, so that He would indeed, die on the cross. He HAD to die in order to take on the sins of the world.

Being born to a human mother, means that He was born as any other human child, and his umbilical cord had to be cut like any other child's, which means he had a belly button.

So scars aren't necessitated on sin, since Jesus was without sin but had at least one scar. How then are scars a result of the fallen sin nature of man if they are not dependent on sin?

There would've never been scars, or bloodshed or injury if sin had not occurred from the gitgo.

Jesus probably had more than one scar. He was a carpenter and he was once a child, learning to walk, a child, playing, running, and most likely fell a few times. he bled, just like you or me. He got scabs, scarring, just like you and me. He had the poential to be frail enough to die, like you and me. He took it on, becoming the "second Adam", "son of man", to do what none else could do, be the One Who would die in our stead, and break the chains of sin and death, snatch back what was taken, providing the "Doorway" to Abba, Father, so that we would be restored to Him, and once again, walk in the cool of the day, in a garden, with Him, as did Adam, a long time ago.

Jesus, in essence, spun back the curse onto itself, and reversed it, making it null and void.

 

[Jazer]

You want to start with the development of language.

Ok, any port in a storm. Can you show me the genetic mutation that results in the development of language?

 

[Jazer]

There would've never been scars, or bloodshed or injury if sin had not occurred from the gitgo.

Do you mean the sin of Adam and Eve? That was 6,000 years ago. Do you not believe Science when they say they have skeltons like Kennewick Man that they date to 8,500 years ago. Or 2,500 years before Adam and Even in the Garden of Eden?

http://www.archaeology.org/9701/etc/specialreport.html

Early descriptions of the Kennewick skull led to reports that the man was Caucasoid and possibly European. After a more careful analysis, the skull appeared to be longer and narrower than those of Native Americans. Dr. Joseph Powell of the University of New Mexico reports that its physical affinities appeared to be closer to those of South Asians or Polynesians than either Europeans or American Indians… http://sepiamutiny.com/blog/2006/03/06/could_the_kenne/

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
There would've never been scars, or bloodshed or injury if sin had not occurred from the gitgo.

Do you mean the sin of Adam and Eve? That was 6,000 years ago. Do you not believe Science when they say they have skeltons like Kennewick Man that they date to 8,500 years ago. Or 2,500 years before Adam and Even in the Garden of Eden?

Special Report: A Battle Over Bones

Is your question for me or God, my brother?

 

[Jazer]

Is your question for me or God, my brother?

I am asking you. God talks to me though the Bible the written word of God. He also talks to me though fossils. As to say look and see what I have done. I just wonder if perhaps God does not speak to you in the same way that He speaks to me through the wonders of His Creation.

"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse," Romans 1:20

 

[brinny]

Originally Posted by brinny
Is your question for me or God, my brother?

I am asking you. God talks to me though the Bible the written word of God. He also talks to me though fossils. As to say look and see what I have done. I just wonder if perhaps God does not speak to you in the same way that He speaks to me through the wonders of His Creation.

"For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse," Romans 1:20

Most surely He does. And He provides His Word like manna to be eaten like spiritual food, to nourish us and feed us.

Where in the Bible is it written that there was man before God created Adam?

 

[Skaloop]

Ok, any port in a storm. Can you show me the genetic mutation that results in the development of language?

There are several, with influence on things like brain development through to the physical structure of our larynx. So there's no one mutation or single gene that give humans linguistic ability. One that is involved in it, though, is FOXP2.

 

[AV1611VET]

OK, so if scars are the result of the sin nature, and Jesus was without sin, did Jesus have a belly button?

What Brinny said --