Has anyone considered that that Adam and Eve didn't eat an "apple" ?
551468
It was a grape. The grape fermented when picked, and produced a tiny bit of alcohol, this begant he breaking down of Eve's and eventually Adam's body. The trees of the garden of Eden are mentioned in the Bible, a fig (for the fig leaves), an olive (for the tree of life), leaving the grape the fruit they consumed.
306575
well , this is not true but I have heard that when adam took a bite of the apple some of it got lodged in his throat and thus the "adams apple" was born.  and isn't it funny that men have one and women do not.?
398249
You're right, it's not the best analogy.  Apples and oranges are both fruits, they both grow on trees, they both have seeds in the middle; however, they have differences: you can eat the skin of an apple and not an orange, an orange has segments, but an apple doesn't.  I guess it's all in the way you look at it!
919827
No, Adam and Eve were the first Homo Sapiens.\n\nYou're trying too hard to fit science and the bible together.  God didn't create a clean rock called Earth.  He created the Earth with a history.  That's how you come to terms with 1,000,000 year old fossils.  He made them that old to begin with.  Connecting evolution to the Bible is easier than you think.
723613
Not really.  What really pees me off is that it is 2006 and there are still so many people who believe in a magic sky fairy that created fruit munching simpletons that lived in a magic garden.  I don't care if their names are Adam and Eve Adam and Steve or Ron and Nancy.  They are myths, and the vast mass of the human race will remain a pack of backward cretins who interfere in the lives of those few of us who can think clearly as long as these myths are taken seriously.  Take for example the gay/lesbian issue.  Here is a list of objections to homosexuality NOT rooted in the arbitrary myths of religion:\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n.
1125805
No, I don't believe in Adam and Eve because if it were true, how would different races come about?\nAnd yeah, it would be incest.. lol
178454
A fun question, but there is no way to know the answer, nor does the answer ultimately matter.  \n\nNevertheless, I'll admit it would be a fun after-dinner conversation starter. <grin>  \n\nPerhaps the better question, if you assume that they DID have belly buttons, is this -- would Adam have collected lint in his belly button prior to taking a bite from the apple or would he only have collected lint after taking the bite?
120907
There is the scientific viewing: Adam and Eve don't exist. It is just a Christian belief. \n\nThe Christian theory: Adam and Eve do exist. But the people of earth (their generations) started talking and decided to build a tower that could reach up to the sky to be as high as God himself. God was not happy so he made them all have different languages. They were angry at each other for everybody thought the other was speaking gibberish. The idea was put off because they could not communicate and all of them moved far away from each other. The Chinese talkers moved to China. The French talkers moved to France. and so forth....
30988
For the children of Adam and Eve (if you believe in their existence), they do have that bacause they are born.\n\nAdam and Eve were not born but created.\nIf according to Science, they both were not likely to have bellybuttons.\n\nHowever, we as humans and as the greatest creations, we still lack of wide portions of knowledge and forever lacking. Unless we strife hard, hope strongly and pray in every instant, we will get to know and understand some purposes of God's creations.\n\nNonetheless, however much we discovered, the knowledge we have compared to the whole knowledge of God is still like drops of water from a dipped finger into the sea.\nOur knowledge is the droplets left on the finger and the remaining other knowledge is the sea. It still majors so much, way too much for us to handle.\n\nI could not answer the question perfect as perfection belongs to the Perfectionist.\nONLY He knows the most.
351681
Lets start with Adam and Eve.\n\nEarlier, they were naked and it was NOT sinful.\n\nLater, after eating the fruit of good and evil, It became sinful. \n\nDid it? Why?\n\nBecause, earlier they didnt have the concept of sin.\nSo they couldnt sin.\nLater, it did, because now they know how to sin.\n\nAnother way...\nIts sinful because a lot of lust and unwanted thoughts as well as adultery ( in the mind and physically ) can be or easily "promoted". \n\nWell, the adulterers, and rapists often blame the women they have illicit sex or rape to be too "sexy". I mean its not uncommon to hear them say, its that womans fault that she wore like that and I couldnt help it etc...\n\nOf course this does not justify what the rapists and adulterers had done. But do you want to be raped and adulterated to for just wanting to show "its nothing wrong to walk naked in front of other people?"\n\nWell, its not about being abstractly correct wether it is wrong or not but rather, the possible consequences ( which are all negative ) speaks for itself.\n\nRegards
270532
1. What happened with Adam and Eve was necessary, but it was a transgression.  If Adam and Eve never would have eaten the forbidden fruit, none of us would be here. They would still remain there in the Garden of Eden in the innocent state that they were in, not knowing good or evil, joy or sorrow, etc.\nAdam and Eve did repent of their transgression, but that really doesn't effect us. God holds each one of us responsible for our own sins, and not for what Adam or Eve did.\n\n2.  Newborns are born pure and innocent.  Until they grow and learn right from wrong they don't have the capacity to commit sin.  But once they are at the age where thy can tell right from wrong, they are accountable for their own sins.
229666
As a Christian, I believe it was the chicken.  Likewise, Adam and Eve did not have navals since they had no umbilical cords.
936247
Just because Bible doesn't mention other humans prior to or alongside Adam and Eve does not mean other people didn't exist.\nIt makes sense for others to be there.  \nI know this opens a whole other can of worms but it is an interesting thought.
654644
Yeah, it's like putting a 4 year old in a room and specifically telling him, "You can look in every box in this room.  But DON'T look in this one particular box."\n\nHe's going to head straight for it.\n\nAnd you have to figure, Adam and Eve would've been supremely naive.  It would be a bit harsh to deal out all the punishment that billions of human's have endured because of one damn apple.\n\nHowever, the tree was not really real.  It just shows that we are evil because we can know the difference between good and evil.  This knowlege makes us responsible for that evil we do.  This is re-affirmed when Jesus said, "Forgive them Lord, for they know not what they do."  You're not guilty if you don't know.\n\nBut WE KNOW the evil we perpetrate, for the most part.  We KNOW when we are assuming things without verifying the fact, and we KNOW when we are talking trash about someone.  We're all pretty base.  Hopefully we all continually try to better ourselves.
724327
Adam and Eve is a biblical story.  Not all people believe in the bible.  Not all people believe  that the biblical god is the real god, thus their gods are not false gods in their eyes.
831254
god created adam and eve not adam and steve or eve and laura
571901
Ooh, nice question.\n\nActually, I think you could make a strong case that they didn't have sex until after they left Eden. There's no mention of it, and I know they had no children when they left. \n\nIt was eating the Fruit of the Tree of Knowledge that made them realize they were naked; is it possible they were having sex prior to this, yet failing to notice this one detail? Which they then figured out from eating a piece of fruit? \n\nI could almost imagine them just not bothering to contemplate the fact that they had different genitals because the subject never "came up", as it were. But the whole Fig Leaf story just sounds absurd if they were copulating the whole time.\n\nAfter the Fall, of course, it wouldn't really matter if they sinned or not, having already been declared sinners.\n\nOn the other hand, if they weren't having sex prior to the Fall, and one assumes that God intended, or at least hoped, that they would not disobey Him and remain in Paradise forever, one has to wonder why He would give them genitals at all. I mean, seriously, what's the point? \n\nAgain, good question.