Who was more physically beautiful, Adam or Eve?

I know that they were the most physically beautiful humans on the planet because they were created directly by God. But the question is, who was more beautiful physically, Adam or Eve and why?

Why does it even matter?


Just curious?

Very possibly they were equally beautiful, Adam in a masculine way, and Eve in a feminine way.


As ‘man’ was created in the image and likeness of God, then they were beautiful. Hence there is such a divergence of races, features common to specific races, yet vastly different - but the same, because all are made in the image and likeness of God. God sees each person He creates as beautiful. Humans differ in their understanding of physical beauty - beauty is in the eye of the beholder.


The beauty of Adam and Eve was great, but in a complementary way.

1 Like

I’m getting old, but I’m not that old! :pleading_face:

1 Like

They were both beautifull because they are created in the imago dei, the image of God. Male and female.

Why physical beauty matters for a human?

It all depends on who you ask…
Ask Adam…
Ask Eve…
Different answers!

(The had BETTER be different!)



Eve. Obviously. Women embody beauty in a way that is unique to their gender.

How about if we asked a different question, I wonder whether the answer would be confusing. What if we asked, which do you think was physically stronger, Adam or Eve? I’m hoping that most here would admit that men exemplify strength in a way that is unique to their gender. As in, the average male human is a lot stronger than the average female human.

I know we are living in an age of gender dysphoria and confusion. But the general, biological distinction that men are strong and women are beautiful should not be lost on us.


Depends what you are attracted to… Beauty is in the eye of the beholder…

1 Like

And it is in the object being beheld. It must be. Otherwise there could be no universal human reaction to beautiful objects. And yet there is such a universal, human reaction. Whether we are compelled to recognize the beauty of a sunset, a cathedral, a garden of flowers, a musical piece or a human female, we all have similar reactions to the same objects. They compel us to recognize the beauty that they embody.

1 Like

Well, according to some private revelations I read, Adam looked liked Jesus, and Eve looked liked the Virgin Mary.


Humans are all individuals and different. Two persons looking at a Cathedral can have different reactions. One thinks it’s ugly, the other one thinks it is so beautiful. I have a friend who loves guitars (I am more of a Mandolin guy), he showed me one that he thought was the most beautifull one he had ever seen… I looked at it and could not comprehend why he got so excited at the sight of this guitar.


Yeah, just like tattoos, some people think they are so beautiful , but I don’t think so.


The world itself is our teacher in these arguments. The human modeling industry is dominated by females. Is there really a question as to why? The answer would seem to very obviously be that humans enjoy beholding females in a way that is unique to their gender (as in, we don’t enjoy beholding males in the same way). If we did, then males and females would likely split the modeling industry more or less evenly (in terms of work and income). And yet, the average salaries of working female and male models is worlds apart. On the male side, the same argument can be made for sport. Why do males dominate athletics (in terms of average salaries and participation)? Human males embody strength/speed in a manner that is unique to their gender.

And no, it would be rare indeed for judgments of “ugly” to be made about, say, Scarlett Johansson, the inside of St Peter’s Basilica, the White House rose gardens or the Ode to Joy climax of Beethoven’s 9th. Folks may not have sufficient background to appreciate the depths of what is being beheld to admire as much of the beauty as you, but none of us have completely different experiences of beauty. As I said, the world is our teacher in these aspects of gender-distinctions. To argue against them is to argue against reality. And that is always a lost cause.


Being beautiful is not a characteristic unique to women – why would you think it is?


Maybe they were beautiful in the eyes of God. Maybe we wouldn’t find them beautiful. And lemme tell you why - we color our hair and our face and our bodies in ways God did not create us. Our vision of beauty may probably be too different by now for us to consider Adam and Eve beautiful.
Plus we have a strict way of considering weight as beautiful. We like to think we do this to aim for our unfallen state. But wait - are we sure this is why we do it?


Among the human genders, being beautiful most certainly is unique to females, just as being strong is unique to male humans. As in, these are general norms among the two human genders. I gave arguments above from human experience that establish that these two general principles hold true - female dominance of the modeling industry and male dominance of the sports industry.

Well it’s certainly your opinion that women are more beautiful. But that’s purely subjective.

Physical strength is measurable, and on average, men have greater upper body strength. Women, on average, have slightly higher IQs. Perhaps that would be a better comparison.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.