Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I remember reading once that the 'model' for the Caucasian, long-haired, bearded Jesus that graces much Chistian artwork/iconography was the son of a pope. He just happened to be present along with the artist who was tasked with creating a 'portrait' of Jesus. Disclaimer: I have no idea if this assertion is factual
It is an interesting thing to ponder, isn't it? I have heard it put forth that Adam - being of course a specimen of a human being created directly by God - would have had to have a navel, because a navel-less human is less perfect.
Some even brought it forth as a creationist argument. As Adam was created with a navel (because a human being without one is imperfect), so the world was created with full evidence of a prehistory of a natural origins, because having one adds to the perfection of the world. Personally, I consider both arguments rather unconvincing, but they're not actually bad points.
No old biblical pictures survive after 2,000 years. All of the pictures you see are an artist's representation of how they imagine the subjects appeared. If all the human bodies you see have belly buttons, you paint a belly button. It's that simple.
Also the absence of a belly button would probably have looked weird to their audience and the artist might be blamed / questioned / criticized for "overlooking" the belly button. Sometimes when you are a creator of things you have to play to your audience's (and patron's) expectations. Besides in thinking about the creation stories, it isn't like people particularly WANT to think through the details like that.
I mean...you think that's the ONLY conceivable issue with the various pics people paint of Adam and Eve? Doesn't bother you that it's usually a couple of blonde people with blue eyes?
More so, it's the 2nd commandment violation. Do not create an idol for yourself. ALL of those pictures, etc, are idolatry and Christianity is the only one out of the three Abrahamic religions that permits it.
But, yes, as said before - dumb artists and poor church censorship, considering that, in younger ages, every religious art was to be approved by church.
Not exactly sure how a picture of Adam and Eve is breaking the 2nd (Protestant) Commandment of Idolatry?
Can’t imagine too many people are going to worship 2 biblical characters, who we don’t even know if the went to Heaven or not.
Adam and Eve is not a story. Literally have the decedents down to Noah, and Jesus. Noah also took Adam's and Eve's clothes, they were handed all the way down to Isaac’s son Esau (12 generations past Noah). Even Nimrod had possession of Adam and Eve's clothes at one point, which gave anyone who wore them superpower.
Adam and Eve is not a story. Literally have the decedents down to Noah, and Jesus. Noah also took Adam's and Eve's clothes, they were handed all the way down to Isaac’s son Esau (12 generations past Noah). Even Nimrod had possession of Adam and Eve's clothes at one point, which gave anyone who wore them superpower.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
