Sunday, September 04, 2005

Adam & Eve navel

Serendipitous events to happen. Having finished last week’s column, and looking over the draft for this week, I took a break to visit a local weekly yard sale. When I arrived, “the Chief’ asked me a question on art: “Why did Renaissance artists depict Adam & Eve with navels?”

Interesting question – obviously, as neither is said to have been born, they no need for umbilical cords. So why would the Church let that flawed presentation appear in artwork they commissioned?

That evening, I Googled “Adam & Eve navel”. The resulting pages indicated believes that either they didn’t have any – and thus might be a non-human species – or the Creator had created a false history.

Both are illogical – a birth mark, or scare, does not differentiate species. As the DNA need be human – with the biblical Eve is the product of trans-gender cloning in which she receives duplicate, or twin, X chromosomes from Adam – a scar could relate to “in the image” as readily as any other explanation.

Of course, in that the story puts a new meaning on incest – asexual reproduction leading to procreation with your own trans-gender clone. Clearly depicting a form of sexual orientation that certainly would be rejected by the Christian Coalition – one which places an interesting spin on their opposition to what they call deviant sexual orientation under our anti-discrimination law.

Another Googled thought: As they were made full grown, none of the trees in the garden had seasonal rings; so, archaeological remnants would be unique. Another question: “Did Adam having nipples?”

Both questions – nipples & navel – raise another interesting theological point: If Adam is the Creators image, then the Creator must have both nipples and navel. We know there is some form of birth – it’s inherent in mention of Nephilim – “the sons of God” in Genesis 6:4 – who were, and are, on the earth.

From a genetic viewpoint, we are both of the same species, or they could not have had children with the daughters of men. Nephilim must have compatible human DNA and physiology; thus nipples & navel.

Their children, we are told, lived before, and after, the flood. So, are we descendants Adam & Eve, via Noah, or are we descendants of half-mortals – and carrying the Creators “blood”?

“God’s sons”, have eternal life – but their offspring (called man, Ge 6:3) live only 120 years. Noah lived 950 years – Adam died at 930 years, and Methuselah 969. How would proponents of Intelligent Design, or Creationism, rationalize these “facts?” Consider: Neanderthals were clearly Human, there was a sudden emergence of Cro-Magnon, and the Neanderthal vanished from the planet.

Man, descendant of Adam, should live nearly 1,000 years; but our life span is under 120 – that implies we are as much descendants of Nephilim half-mortals as we are of Cro-Magnon. Are they the same?

With Noah comes another dietary prohibition (Ge 9:4) – equivalent to the forbidden fruit (Ge 2:17). It is in violation of this – approved by the Christian Coalition – whereby man is condemned to die by the hand of man (Ge 9:5). This was affirmed Aug 22nd, when their founder, Pat Robertson, called for the cold blooded murder of the Venezuelan President. (Violating Ge 20:13).

WOW! An curious chain of facts derived from a simple yard sale question – the reason for 9/11, Iraq, and all wars, falls on those who eat haggis, blood pudding, sausage and the like. Clearly a fact which cannot be argued by any who assert the literal truth of scripture.

No comments: