Did Adam have a belly-button?


PLAIN, old religion can be complicated enough, but if you seek confusion in its purest form, check out the burning question of whether Adam had a belly button.
The debate over the ownership, or otherwise, of a navel by the reputed first man on the planet has been raging recently on some of the Internet’s chat lines.
There are three popular positive positions on the subject.
The first, held by pre-umbilists, is that Adam’s navel was formed in the millisecond Adam was created from dust. Following the belief that Adam was created in the image of God, the pre-umbilists argue that, therefore, God had an umbilical cord. But connected to what?
Mid-umbilists believe the first belly button resulted when God removed Adam’s rib to create Eve. A simple, surgical scar.
Then there are the post-umbilists. They say Adam’s navel was created after he and Eve were thrown out of the Garden of Eden.
Why this would be so is a mystery.
Not since Barbara Eden was forced to cover up her belly button for the 1960s TV series I Dream of Jeannie has there been so much interest in the subject.
The theological Internet chat rooms are buzzing with theories.
Meanwhile, historians are still embroiled in an argument over whether the terms BC and AD to denote time periods are politically incorrect and offensive to other faiths, such as Hindus and Muslims.
And Muslims in Malaysia are arguing about whether Christians can use the term Allah.
Sorting all that out could be harder than proving whether Adam had a navel.


11 thoughts on “Did Adam have a belly-button?

  1. 😆 Good one Bryan!

    I loved the movie Yentl. I could picture myself as a Jew arguing my head off in a yeshiva over Scripture but certainly not over whether Adam had a belly button or not. 😯


  2. Yes, he did, according to this theory. Adam was the first man created in God’s image, which was not a physical image. As God can be seen as a trinity of Wisdom, Love, and Power, man can be seen as an imperfect reflection of these – logic, emotion, and desire to control. As he struggles to refine these, the desire to control develops into self control, as logic and emotion also lead to ‘higher’ aspects.


    • um…..you Did say you’re a Taswegian, didn’t you, Dreamweaver??

      Just as well, otherwise you might find yourself in trouble! 😉


      • Um, please explain? I’m not a Taswegian, what is this trouble I’m now expecting? 🙂


      • I thought you said some time ago (during the discussion about two heads) that you said you were Taswegian.

        Now, if you were one, the confusing mish-mash in your post would be nothing out of the ordinary.
        But, since you’re not, the suggestion is that you keep an eye open for men in white coats….. 😉


  3. Oh dear!
    …though, as everyone points out, the Crusades ended long ago religious violence continues apace. Here –> too:- http://au.news.yahoo.com/world/a/19406020/indian-police-officials-suspended-over-deadly-temple-stampede/

    As was pointed out, in the thread about heaven being peaceful, man can live without bread, without god, but NOT without conflict and violence. I suspect religion may have been invented for the sole purpose of providing an outlet for our innate violence, which may account for the misguided (recurring!) claim that man has a ‘natural bent’ for religion; one would find it difficult to argue about nothing.
    (I also suspect that’s why god created Eve ~ and her descendents, of course ~ jut in case religion failed to find popularity.) 🙂

    Would ANY of you trade religion and women for mere peace??


  4. Interesting question, the belly-button thing; but I think some clear-headed reasoning can demonstrate (demon-strate??) that Adam clearly DIDN’T have a belly-button. viz.:-


    • Hi Dabbles,
      this discussion tosses me way way back to my childhood and my Methodist upbringing in the forties. Such a term as ‘belly button’ was well and truly forbidden in an old fashioned family like mine. You never said the word Belly!

      In those mealy mouthed days of purity and respectability, there were just so many legitimate words one should never say. Heck I’ve still got a whole list of these words in my head. They were the days when no clergyman would say blithely that ‘We need bums on seats!’

      The popular entertainers Michael Flanders and Donald Swann who composed the famous Hippopotamus song (Mud mud glorious mud) wrote a cute little ditty on the ‘rude’ words. it ran
      Ma’s out. Pa’s out. Let’s talk rude
      Pee Po Belly Bum Drawers.

      honestly it would have been enough to give my poor dear mother a heart attack!



      • Yep! I remember them well……back when the methodists banned sex……in case it led to dancing!
        ……and Mrs Grundy educated the local farmers about ‘gentlemen cows’.



  5. Interesting question, the belly-button thing; but I think some clear-headed reasoning can demonstrate (demon-strate??) that Adam clearly DIDN’T have a belly-button. viz.:-
    As far as an atheist is concerned there was no such thing as an ‘Adam’. Hence:- No Adam, no Adam’s belly-button.

    If, on the the hand, one is a Believer (or otherwise deficient), a moment’s thought reminds one that Adam had no mum ~ obsessive-compulsive belly-button kissers by nature ~ and therefore had no need for a belly-button, since it serves no other purpose. (Unlike, for example, a tushie, another favourite target of maternal kompulsive-kissers.)
    And since believers insist that god is omniscient (‘The Ultimate Know-All’), it stands to reason that He’d have known that.

    Moreover, since Believers also devoutly dogmatise god as an Intelligent Designer, it stands to reason (forgive the foul language!) that he’d have refrained from designing Adam with a belly-button, since only an UNintelligent designer would add pointless accessories to a design, wasting resources and adding weak-points.

    ergo!: neither atheists nor believers can make a case for Adam’s belly-button, and all their non-beliefs and beliefs rule out the proposition that Adam had a belly-button; and in the absence of any objective evidence it’s clear that only a non-thinker ~ eg C.S.Lewis ~ would, most unreasonably, claim that Adam did have a belly-button.

    quod erat demonstrandum


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s