In my capacity as editor of a publication on religion and media, two terms that consistently mean as many different things as we have readers — and admittedly, we like it that way! — I receive a lot of interesting email that begs for an answer to some profound question. But I’m not a theologian, nor an academic, nor a biologist (nor many other things too vast to list). Usually, I respond with profuse humility and apology, giving the inquirer as many alternate resources as I can scrounge up. But the question in my inbox this morning has me stumped. If anyone can help me out with this query, I’d be extremely grateful. John writes, with the subject line, “Adam — In the Image of God”:
I know this is not an easy question as there were no witnesses. Do you believe Adam had nipples? This is not meant to be sarcastic or offending. From a[n] evolutionary perspective it makes sense. All fetuses start out as females, thus the nipples. Only later when testosterone is added the fetus will develop testicles and a penis. And the nipples stay. So would Adam have nipples? And if so what would be the reason if creation were the case and not evolution?