Is there really such a thing as a child that is not inquisitive? We decided before our first child was born that we would answer all the questions. We promised each other and our unborn daughters we wouldn’t say: Because I told you so, that’s why… or the ever popular: because I’m your father, that’s why. We were determined to sweat out the interrogations of our three year olds and eventual teenagers. We hadn’t anticipated the creativity of these toddlers who sensed early-on that we were confident we could deal with the non-stop whys. Sometimes when one why kept following another I suspected they weren’t really looking for answers but trying to wear me down. 
Those inquisitive three year olds can be tough. I will admit I eventually fell prey at times to the mounting frustration and answered a why with a why not. Sometimes I answered a “why” with a Z, alphabetizing their question. They were relentless.
But… they had some great questions! There were questions like: why they have to go to bed; why the sun comes up every morning and why they have to get dressed but the family dog doesn’t and why does it hurt so much. After decades of enjoying the privilege of reading the Bible and witnessing the incredibly intelligent design of creation it has become apparent that it is only Bible students (who truly respect the scientific and logical validation of the creation record) that have the exclusive capacity to answer the surprisingly deep questions of these three year olds. We shouldn’t underestimate the ‘intelligent’ component in creation’s design. In fact, all of creation serves as confirming testimony for the Creator’s principals, promises, prophesies and judgments.
The real problem with answering a ‘why’ question is that society teaches us from an early age to convert ‘why’ questions into ‘how’ answers. This is inappropriate. A ‘why’ question is all about motivation. Any police detective could tell us that. If we ask why the sun comes up in the morning we will be lectured about how planetary gravitation controls Earth’s spinning rotation around the sun. Unfortunately that is a ‘how’ answer. A procedural answer does not address a motivational inquiry. That is simply avoidance, similar to how practiced politicians answer questions that haven’t been asked, only pretending to answer the interviewer’s probe.
Our progressive commentaries on how the features and components of creation perfectly parallel the inspired written word of the Creator, miraculously preserved for over 2,500 years, leads us to these underestimated questions from our toddlers. Why doesn’t the family dog wear clothes like our children? Shouldn’t we wonder why human beings have a distinct emotionally based need to cover their nakedness? This urge is completely exclusive to mankind. There are no animals, fish, insects or birds that make any attempt to develop clothing to cover their created forms. Beasts do not suffer or benefit (depending on perspective) from shame. This is an indisputable exclusive feature about creation… covering the naked shamefulness of mankind. Why is this?
The Very Intelligent Designer presents the answer to that question repeatedly throughout the Bible, beginning with Adam and Eve’s failure. Adam and Eve were not created with any shameful instincts. They were unclothed, just like all the animals, but suffered no shame. Then they broke the one law given them, introducing sin into a previously “very good” creation (Genesis 1:31). Sin corrupted the physical features of creation, what society calls ‘nature’ into what we now see every day. Death was introduced into these corrupted laws of ‘nature’ because of the introduction of sin. Adam and Eve’s immediate experience was shame for their nakedness. They covered their shameful nakedness with fig leaves sown together into makeshift coverings. Those coverings were removed by God and replaced with two coats made from a single animal hide. This was an educational exercise about covering the shame of their nakedness which was a direct result of sin being introduced into a previously very good creative order. This word for skins is not plural in the original Hebrew. It is singular. There was only one skin from which both animal hide coverings were prepared by God… just as there is only one Savior who can cover the shameful sins of men and women. The covering of sins is what the concept of atonement is all about. Sadly many pretend Bible students think that atonement is all about just forgiveness. The original Hebrew word that is translated “atonement” is directly translated as cover (verb) or covering (noun). This is why that same Hebrew word predominantly translated atonement throughout the Old Testament is also used by God in commanding Noah to cover (paint) the gopher wood ark of salvation with a pitch sealant. Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shall thou make in the ark, and shall pitch it within and without with pitch (Genesis 6:14). Noah was commanded to paint (pitch/verb) that massive ark with a sealing unguent (pitch/noun). That verb “pitch” is translated from the exact same word that is commonly translated as atonement. A quick glance at any Bible concordance can confirm that simple observation.
The ultimate answer for the physical and spiritual corruption that Adam and Eve introduced into creation, through sin, is resurrection. The Apostle Paul makes this issue perfectly clear: What advantage is it to me, if the dead rise not? Let us eat and drink; for tomorrow we die (1 Corinthians 15:32). Paul points out that without the resurrection we might as well live indulgently because without the resurrection there is no hope whatsoever. Paul also points out that: If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable (vs. 18). There is the hope of the resurrection … or there is nothing. Interestingly, the resurrection is repeatedly expressed in terms of a covering. (1 Corinthians 15:51-54) Behold, I show you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed, In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed. For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality. So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory. The defeat of death, introduced by the sin of Adam and Eve, is accomplished by the covering (atonement) of immortality.
This issue of salvation being a covering, an atonement that is realized at the resurrection, is a massive theme threading all through scripture and even the intelligent terms of creation (nature).
My little daughters, this is why we have to get dressed, but the family dog doesn’t. Every new morning, after we rise from a death-like sleep (resurrection) and then we cover our shameful nakedness to project the image of salvation from creation’s very intelligent designer. This parable of nature portraying divine principles and hope is offered exclusively for those with eyes to see and ears to hear.