Christian Message Boards: Adam's creation

This is topic Adam's creation in forum Questions & Answers at Christian Message Boards.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://thechristianbbs.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=38;t=000394

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

Here are a couple of questions that should provoke some interesting discussion:

Did Adam have nipples?

If so, why?

Posted by corriee (Member # 6705) on :

I would say yes, and because that is the way
God made us.
before Eve was made did Adam have a soul that could sin, or did that
come with eating the apple?

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

Corriee,
Thanks for you response, but you really haven't completely answered my question.

Your explanation:

quote:
because that is the way
God made us

doesn't give me or anyone else any practical reason for the appearance of nibbles on the man, Adam, not at this point in creation.

In response to your additional question:

quote:
did Adam have a soul that could sin, or did that
come with eating the apple?

I would answer by indicating that Adam and Eve both decided to sin by disobeying God's commandment before they ate the forbidden fruit.

I still would like to know if Adam had nipples before Eve was created. If so, why?

Posted by corriee (Member # 6705) on :

Yes Adam probably had breasts, and not a belly button.
Don't animals of both sexes have breasts?
The reason is because that is what a breast looks like on humans. I think he had every part modern man has.
Does this answer count..? lol..what is the reason for this question? I would never have
thought about it if you hadn't ask.lol..

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

Corriee,
My question is specifically about nibbles, which are special physical structures that are apparently designed to transmit milk from the physical organs (breasts) in the body of a mammal where it is created through the skin of that milk-producing mammal to the mouth of the sucking creature that is seeking this nourishment.

I'm not an expert in animal biology, but I don't think that bulls have tits. I don't believe that the bodies of all mammals of both genders have nibbles. I don't remember seeing nibbles on male dogs when I was a kid. I don't believe that all animals have breasts, particularly those that are designed to produce milk or other nourishing fluids for their young.

You make a good point when you indicate that Adam probably didn't have a belly button. I can believe that. Could he have probably not have had any nibbles as well, although the next generation (and all subsequent generations) of human creatures of both sexes would have both?

There is no special reason for my question, although I think that it has some implications for the creation-evolution conflict.

Let's see how some other viewers respond to my question.

Posted by lonlesol (Member # 4511) on :

quote:
I don't remember seeing nibbles on male dogs when I was a kid. I don't believe that all animals have breasts, particularly those that are designed to produce milk or other nourishing fluids for their young.

Male dogs and male cats do have nipples. They are smaller, true, and harder to locate, but they are definitely there...

I have searched for an answer on the internet and I found this one that might be worth considering...

Male nipples aren't exactly a genetic glitch: they are evidence of our developmental clock. In the early stages of life from conception until about 14 weeks, all human fetuses look the same, regardless of gender. At the tender age of 14 weeks post-fertilization , genetically-male fetuses begin to produce male hormones including testosterone. These hormones turn the androgynous fetus into a bouncing baby boy.

Here's where the developmental clock comes in. By 14 weeks, when the hormones turn on, the nipples have already formed. So, while our male fetus goes on to become a baby boy, he keeps his nipples, reminding all of us that people, male and female, started off the same way.

In most men, the nipples really don't change after this point, but some men can develop a condition called gynecomastia. In gynecomastia, the fatty tissue around the nipple develops and eventually appears similar to a female breast. This can occur whenever the testosterone level is lowered by medications, such as those that treat prostate cancer, and by natural hormonal changes due to obesity, adolescence or aging.

Luckily, most of us don't worry too much about male nipples, so men never have to worry about finding swimtrunks and a bikini top that fit.

A moment of science

Posted by TB125 (Member # 2450) on :

lonlesol,
Thanks for your correction of my experience with male dogs.

I understand the scientific process for the creation of a human fetus, which includes the blending of both female and male genetic codes. I know that the human fetus is basically female in nature until the male hormones kick in and transform the fetus into a male.

But this process only strengthens the reason for my question since Adam was not created through this process! I can understand why Cain and Abel had nipples, but I still don't understand why Adam had any, if he did.

Can you see how this question has some implications for how we explain the unique and special activities of God in creation, particularly in the creation of mammals like us humans?

Thanks for your addition to our discussion.

Posted by steviedvm (Member # 6674) on :

Bob,
Today's forum was a great way to start my day. It brought back fond memories of how often I was accused of mis-identifying the gender of young kittens. Many an owner has called me back to state that their cat must be female because it had nipples. This misconception (no pun intended) is so common that it was a question on one of my veterinary exams "How many nipples does a stallion have?" On the subject of Adam, my gut feeling says he had 2.

Posted by sevenlamps (Member # 6715) on :

If Adam did'nt have nipples, then where did they come from? Everything reproduces after it's kind according to the bible. As for the belly bitton, Adam was created from clay so may not have had a belly button. That might be left over from child birth. Here is a little trivia. Did you know that God did not give Eve her name? The bible says God created them male and female and called them Adam(which means made from the earth) It was Adam that called Eve 'woman' because she was made from his bone, and Eve because she was the mother of all living. So I think it might be OK to name a girl Adam but I don't think it would be OK to name a boy Eve. What does everyone else think?

Posted by Caretaker (Member # 36) on :

Adam's Creation

Did Adam have nipples?

Quite possibly, since nipples are especially sensitive and are a source of sexual stimuli. Since they have a function, they are consistent with a design explanation. They do not seem analogous to the navel, which is simply a scar where the human was once attached via the umbilical cord to his or her mother. So Adam and Eve would probably have lacked navels because they didn’t have mothers.

No, the design explanation for male nipples makes more sense. But even if male nipples had no known use, there is another important reason why they exist in today’s males. That is, they are the result of an efficient plan of embryonic development. Human embryos contain characteristics of both sexes at first, because they all have basically the same genetic information, and this information is expressed as efficiently as possible as the embryo develops. This is design economy. For example, in all human embryos, at first both the müllerian duct system (female) and the wolffian duct system (male) develop, because both sexes have the genetic information for these structures. Incidentally, this refutes the urban myth that human embryos ‘start off female’. The subsequent differences are the result of designed chemical signals that control the expression of the information. E.g., a gene set usually found on the Y chromosome controls the levels of testosterone and dihydroxytestosterone (DHT) secretion. Above a certain level, these hormones suppress the development of the müllerian duct system and promote the wolffian duct system, so the embryo takes on masculine characteristics. Below a certain hormone level, the opposite happens, and the embryo takes on female characteristics.

Posted by aiopj (Member # 6768) on :

Of course, it's what the Word of God calls a "foolish question."

Posted by PresbyGirl (Member # 6818) on :

Okay. Here's my stab at this one. The Bible says that God created human beings in God's image -- male and female. God's image is both male and female. Anatomically speaking, gender specific characteristics are present in some form in both males and females. Some are more highly developed and/or specialized depending on gender. That is true also for characteristics we consider gender specific -- like compassion in females and aggression in males. Both genders have both to some degree. Now we know that God is spirit and not corporeal, but our bodies aren't just functional. They are reflections of God's image metaphorically, as well as being our instruments of love, our means for serving God and each other while on earth. For instance, breasts are symbolic of God's nurturing character(something we think of as more female than male). Reproductive organs speak of his creative nature. So if God's image is both male and female, then it stands to reason that male and female characteristics would be present in both genders. I love the fact that men have undeveloped breasts because it reminds them that they are incomplete without women. I also love the fact that women have underdeveloped male organs for the same reason. We need and complete each other as image bearers of God.