The second image of God passage only adds to the confusion. This passage employs the term "likeness" to describe the similarity between God and humanity: "This is the record of Adam's line-When God created man, He made him in the likeness of God; male and female He created them." But the passage then goes on to use the terms "likeness" and "image" to describe the similarity of Adam and his son Seth: "When Adam had lived 130 years, he begot a son in his likeness after his image, and he named hin1 Seth" (Gen. 5:1-3). If Gen. 5:1-3 is read by itself, it seems to suggest that the likeness between God and humanity is ofa different order than the likeness between a father and son. The resemblance between God and humanity is described by the word "likeness" only. But Adam begets a son who is both in his likeness and image. But if Gen. 5:1-3 is read as a supplement to Gen. 1:26-28, the opposite is the case: the same terms are used to describe the resemblance between Seth and Adam (Gen. 5:3) and between God and humanity (Gen. 1:26-27). The point of these myths, then, may be to hide the basic tensions through a screen ofconfusion. To be sure, these maneuvers do not entirely hide the problem. But given an impossible task, these myths rise to the occasion.