Two creation stories?

Mallon said:

Does the waw consecutive not denote sequence in Genesis 2?

Click to expand...

Of course so, my point is more to guard against making the prose history which is what most will argue the use of the waw consecutive does. At times it does denote sequence but not always, it just means "and".

shernren said:

Indeed. 'Tis important to go back to the original Hebrew. The KJV is hardly the most reliable translation around; we've come a long way since then.

Click to expand...

I agree that it is important to go back to the original languages, but many supposedly do this, while demonstrating that they are not willing to simply accept what it says. Your contention is indeed worth checking out, but I do not have time to do this right now.

But what do you mean by the comment that we have come a long way since then. I assume you mean since the time the KJV was translated.

I use the KJV in ordinary discussion of the scriptures, but I am not a KJV only freak. But I am also not a subscriber to the notions of the majority of the so-called "critical editors." These have finally agreed on a text they feel is far closer to the original, but in doing so they have given what I consider an undue amount of respect to a few texts that differ markedly from the overwhelming majority. These texts are given what I consider undue respect because they are thought to be significantly older than the others.

But the oldest of these texts (Sinaiticus and Vaticanus) differ significantly from each other, as well as from the vast majority of other texts. So some argue with significant logic that the reason these manuscripts lasted so long was that nobody used them because they were so different from the rest. That is, the main reason almost all old manuscripts of the scriptures ceased to exist was that they eventually wore out from repeated use, and were finally discarded when they could no longer be read. So a manuscript being significantly older than others does not necessarily prove it is more reliable.

But I also have a problem with the alleged ages of many ancient documents. How do they know how old a manuscript is? The only reliable way to establish a date for an ancient object is radiocarbon dating. And the owners of most of these manuscripts will not allow that because it cannot be done without physically destroying at least part of the object itself.

gfleece said:

What is to be done with these two different stories found in Genesis? I am sure that there is an answer but how convoluted is it?

Click to expand...

I believe in two creations in Genesis, and have for over 30 years. Genesis 1:26-29 God says.. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
27 So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.
28 And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.
29 And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. Here God says that He gave them every tree...no mention of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, and no placing them in the garden. Also, no breath of life in the nostrils.
In Genesis 2:7-9 God says this.. And the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.
8 And the LORD God planted a garden eastward in Eden; and there he put the man whom he had formed.
9 And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of knowledge of good and evil.
People have wondered for years where Cain got his wife in the land of Nod if Adam and Eve and Cain were the only people on the earth at this time...Abel was dead. It is because there was a former "formed" creation. I could go into more detail about the generations being different from the formed people and from Adam. They don't match, but don't have time right now. I have looked at this in other translations and it doesn't change the context at all.

Hi Gfleece, Hatsoff, lemmings, Chief :

gfleece said:

What is to be done with these two different stories found in Genesis? I am sure that there is an answer but how convoluted is it?

Click to expand...

When a man comes along and presents ‘the truth’ of Genesis 1 and 2, then the majority here turns their heads to look the other way. Therefore, get ready to turn your head to look the other way. :0)

hatsoff said:

Whoever edited the two stories together obviously believed they complimented one another. Beyond that, we can't say very much about the authors' intents. However, one need not be concerned about contradictions between two allegorical narratives.

Click to expand...

This is really a very funny reply. The author of Genesis 1 and 2 is Moses (by the Holy Spirit Helper) representing just one incarnation (skin = Gen. 3:21) of your mother Eve (Adam’s helper) like Noah, Sarah and Bathsheba. Incarnations for the Lord God’s other witness (Adam) include Joshua, Abraham, David, Elijah, John the Baptist and the ‘prophet’ of Acts 3:22-23 coming to restore all things. There are no contradictions in God’s Living Word, but MANY appear in the minds of deluded men blinded by their various forms of Denominationalism (2Thes 2:7-12). The Author’s intentions (God through The Word) is to tell the story of how this universe was called to exist IN The Word (Christ Jesus = F+S+HS = diagram), so that all things hold together IN Him (Col. 1:17) in Genesis 1, until God rested on this seventh day (Gen. 2:1-3). Only then did the “Lord God” (Christ) begin His consecrating work by creating Adam and the Garden (Gen. 2:7-8) to represent the entire universe, as one man sent from God. Eve (water witness) was taken from Adam’s side (spirit witness) in the very same way that the earth was taken from ‘eth-Erets (The Earth = water witness helper) of Genesis 1:1 ‘and’ the Holy Spirit (water witness Helper) was taken from the side of “The Word/Heaven” (F+S+HS), as all of God’s original ‘Singularity Expressions’ (God Himself, The Word/Heaven, Creation, Adam, etc., have taken on a ‘triune’ (image of man) image. All spirit witnesses bear the number one and all blood witnesses bear the number two and all of the water witness helpers take on the number three, so that added together (1+2+3) the number of each ‘man’ is six (6). :0) Christ Jesus is the “man” Christ Jesus (1Tim 2:5), because He is the Father (1), Son (2) and Holy Spirit (3) all rolled “into the One” (1Jn 5:8); but ONLY for those with eyes from God to see what the heck I am talking about. :0) The fact that ‘you’ see contradictions in God’s Living Word, ‘and’ are not concerned at all, means someone here will continue to see ‘two allegorical narratives’ without making the spirit, blood and water Singularity/Trinity connections.

gfleece said:

I don't believe that they are allegorical at all. I believe that they represent the actuality of how the earth came into existence. I was just curious how many explanations may be posited as to why the stories differ so much.

Click to expand...

Genesis 1 describes how ‘God’ (The Almighty of Rev. 1:8 = the God who raised Christ from the dead) created the Universe (‘eth-Erets of Gen. 1:1 = John 1:3) mature, perfect and complete, before that perfect creation became formless and void (Gen. 1:2) resulting in the ‘Big Bang’ (my thread). God then sent “The Light” (Gen. 1:3, John 1:4-9 = Christ) into this broken universe to begin the ‘reconstitution’ process of recreating the heavens (spirit witness), heaven (blood witness) and earth (water witness helper) of Genesis 1:6-8. I explain how the “Erets Shift” works in a recent post to Hitter here and here (continued), if anyone is interested.

lemmings said:

As far as I am aware there are only two conflicting details in the accounts.
Gen 1 says that humans came after the other animals: Gen 2 says before.
Gen 1 says that Adam and Eve where created at the same time: Gen 2 says that she was created after the other animals.

Click to expand...

No sir. The male and female of Genesis 1 represent the ‘sixth day’ races like the Aborigine and Native Indian peoples (beardless races) that have been part of this earth landscape for millions of years. Adam (son of God = Singularity Expression) was ‘created’ with Eve (water witness) and her seed (blood witness) “IN” him (diagram), like the heavens, heaven and earth (diagram) were all “IN” ‘eth-Erets of Genesis 1:1. This universe is “The Earth” of Genesis 1:1 ‘and’ Adam is the “man of the earth” in Genesis 2:7 representing the heavens (Adam’s spirit), heaven (Adam’s soul) and earth (Adam’s physical body helper = Eve) in one “man sent from God” (John 1:6) that has been testifying about “The Light,” as the original 'cultivator of the land,' from the very beginning. Jesus Christ (F+S+HS) is the “Lord God” of Genesis 2:4+ the “Son of God” (John 1:34) and the “Heavenly Messiah,” ‘and’ Adam (heavens, heaven and earth) is His “son of God” representing the “man of the earth” as the “Earthly Messiah” for the Kingdom of God “on earth AS IT IS in heaven” (Matt. 6:10). Those of you thinking that the primitive sixth day people of Genesis 1:26-28 represent ‘Adam and Eve’ (heh) are lost and without a clue from the very beginning.

lemmings said:

My parents’ church’s policy is that Gen 1 applied to the entire Universe but Gen 2 applied only two Eden. Their solution was that the animals where created first, but Adam the first to enter Eden and Eve came after the animals where already there.

Click to expand...

Your parents appear to be wiser than the average bear and park ranger on these Genesis topics. :0) The difference is that the animals of Genesis 1 include ‘all’ prehistoric animals from trilobites to the dinosaurs, mammoths, saber-toothed tigers, etc., while the animals that Adam named (Gen. 2:18-19) are 'heavenly’ singularity expression hosts that have only recently been transformed into their ‘water witness hosts’ with the fall that took place a mere 6000 years ago. Adam lived in his perfect and mature state with Eve and her seed IN him for thousands and thousands and thousands of years (Gen. 2:7+), before they were taken from his side in preparation for Adam’s water witness to be beguiled by the serpent; which allowed Satan’s evil seed to enter the garden equation. Satan’s evil seed (Cain with all liars, murders and thieves, etc.) became part of the righteous branch in the same way that darkness entered ‘eth-Erets in Genesis 1:2 with the fall of the perfect creation of Genesis 1:1. God divided the darkness from the Light in Genesis 1 in the same way that the Son of Man (the Lord God) will divide the sheep and the goats at the Judgment (Rev. 20:11-15) described by Christ in Matthew 25:31-34. I will answer one more Page 1 post, then the whining can begin. :0)

Chief117 said:

I also do not think the 2 contradict each other. It would probably help discussion if you stated what precisely it was that made you feel that there is a contradiction. Nonetheless I think I'll take a stab at what I think it might be:

Click to expand...

This is a very good observation by Chief, as the majority here would rather fill these threads with one-liner nonsense adding nothing whatsoever to the deliberation process. Every post on this thread using no Scriptural references represents what many Board Mods call ‘minimal posts’ that are oftentimes deleted from the discussion entirely. Since MANY of these CF.com members believe quantity is superior to ‘quality of work,’ then this place is literally filled with empty posts throwing effort after nothing more than foolishness.

Chief117 said:

Genesis 1 is more like a broad overview of the Creation week.

Click to expand...

No sir. Genesis 1:1 is the broad overview of God creating the Heaven (Word) and Earth (Adam) perfect, mature and complete in the flash of a single moment. That Earth existed in a perfect and mature state for billions and billions of years, from our earthbound perspective, until all of that became formless and void in Genesis 1:2. God ‘then’ began the ‘reconstitution’ process of reassembling (forming) the heavens (spirit witness) that existed LONG AGO (2Peter 3:5) and the earth (water witness) by water, as the helper of the heavens and heaven (Gen. 1:8) in the same way that Eve (water witness) is Adam’s and her seed’s helper ‘and’ the Holy Spirit (water witness) is the Helper of the Father and Son.

There is NO CREATION WEEK in Genesis 1!!!!! What is the matter with you guys that nobody can add or subtract the right number of days included in the ‘reconstitution’ process of “God’s work”???? There are only ‘six’ days of creation reconstruction in Genesis 1!!!! Since when does six days equal a week? :0) God RESTED on this still-ongoing ‘seventh day’ (Gen. 2:1-3) so that the “Lord God” (Christ = F+S+HS) took over in Genesis 2:4 to THEN create Adam and the Garden perfect and mature like ‘eth-Erets of Genesis 1:1!! Try to let the substance of that single statement sink in a little bit and perhaps many of your misconceptions will dissolve to make space between your ears for ‘the truth’ of how things really began in Genesis 1 and 2.

[Continued]

Chief117 said:

It states what actions God took on each day as He formed the universe and life from nothing. Genesis 2 comes back and elaborates on the sixth day's events. If I am not mistaken, this was a common practice among Hebrew authors (to provide a broad overview and later come back to elaborate).

Click to expand...

No sir. We agree that you are very much mistaken, as you have adopted a common misinterpretation of Genesis 1 and 2. God is working in Genesis 1, while the Lord God (Christ) is doing His “High Priest” (Heb. 8:1-2) consecration work on this ‘seventh day,’ as the “Lord of the Sabbath” (Matt. 12:8) in Genesis 2. Moses is no mere Hebrew author, but he represents one of the Lord God’s “two witnesses” formed by His Own hand way back in Genesis 2:20-22; when she was ‘drawn’ from Adam’s side in the first place. Elijah (spirit), Christ (blood) and Moses (water) on the Mount of Transfiguration (diagram) represent God’s three ‘begottens’ who all walked in the Garden (Adam, Lord God, Eve) to spread ‘her seed’ and ‘your seed’ (Gen. 3:15), so that those called by God Himself can be summed up IN them. Eve (Noah/Moses = mother of all the living) represents the ‘body of Moses’ (Jude 1:9) and all of those baptized into his/her body (1Cor. 10:1-4), so that eventually they can be summed up IN Christ like the believers in our gospel (1Cor. 12:12-24, 27) by obeying the gospel. The last shall be first and the first will be last, because the last ‘two witnesses’ (Rev. 11) are the first that the Lord God formed way back in the Garden. :0) For those of you willing to accept it (like Christ said = Matt. 11:13-14), John the Baptist ‘and’ the coming ‘prophet’ of Acts 3:22-23 are none other than ‘skins’ (Gen. 3:21) for your father Adam the ‘Earthly Messiah’ like Christ is the ‘Heavenly Messiah.’

Chief117 said:

Genesis 2 often confused me when it said "...when no plant of the field was yet in the earth...then the Lord God formed man of the dust." I always thought this was weird because Gen 1 says vegetation appeared on Day 3 and man/animals on Day 6.

Click to expand...

You have failed to recognize the ‘Erets Shift’ where “The Earth” of Genesis 1:1 is the entire universe, which digresses down to the galaxy chains, this local galaxy and solar system and planet Earth and then the ‘land’ of the garden in Genesis 2.

Chief117 said:

But here's the key (as hinted in Gen 2): it means no plants OF THE FIELD. It had not yet rained on Day 6, and man did not have to work IN THE FIELD until after the fall. So the author (presumably Moses, writing centuries after the event) is reminding his readers that the world at that time is very different from the one we enjoy today.

Click to expand...

Not exactly. :0) The Greek term “kosmos” is akin to the Hebrew term “erets” in that both can represent the entire universe, this local planet earth, a particular ‘land’ or a handful of dirt. When you say ‘earth,’ then the context tells everyone if the subject is dirt, this planet or the entire universe of Genesis 1:1 in the very same way. Understanding ‘the truth’ of Genesis 1 and 2 requires each reader to understand precisely which water witness host that ‘God’ is talking about through “His Living Word,”

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Big Mouth Nana said:

I believe in two creations in Genesis, and have for over 30 years.

Click to expand...

I don't think it is accurate to say that there are two creations, rather there are two creation stories. The first is that provided by the Priestly writer (P) forming Gen. 1:1-2:4a. The second by the Yahwist (J) 2:4b ff.

Iosias said:

I don't think it is accurate to say that there are two creations, rather there are two creation stories. The first is that provided by the Priestly writer (P) forming Gen. 1:1-2:4a. The second by the Yahwist (J) 2:4b ff.

Click to expand...

OK..how ever you want to say it. What I see is that there were two sets of people created. One set were formed, the other created. One woman was formed, one woman created from the rib of Adam. That doesn't mean that God created everything in heaven and under the heavens all over again..just the people. Like I stated in my first post..the genelogies don't match. I like to keep things simple. I don't know who the Priestly writer (J) was, nor the Yahwist. I generally go by what God said alone..which always works for me Cut this old lady some slack please. I don't understand a lot of the terminology people use these days. I'm a simple thinking woman

Hi BMN:

Big Mouth Nana said:

I don't know who the Priestly writer (J) was, nor the Yahwist. I generally go by what God said alone..which always works for me.

Click to expand...

None of that priestly Yahwist lingo means anything. Moses wrote the entire book of Genesis by inspiration of God. 2Timothy 3:16-17.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Terral said:

Hi BMN:



None of that priestly Yahwist lingo means anything. Moses wrote the entire book of Genesis by inspiration of God. 2Timothy 3:16-17.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Click to expand...

2 Timothy 3:16-17 (New American Standard Bible)
16 All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
17 so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.

Click to expand...

It does mention scripture being inspired, but not that Moses wrote the entire book of Genesis.

Hi Assyrian:

Assyrian said:

It does mention scripture being inspired, but not that Moses wrote the entire book of Genesis.

Click to expand...

Where is your case for anyone other than Moses writing one word of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers or Deuteronomy? Just how many books of Scripture are co-authored other than Genesis for you?? :0) Good luck. Scripture says,

"But he said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead.'" Luke 16:31.

"Then beginning with Moses and with all the prophets, He explained to them the things concerning Himself in all the Scriptures." Luke 24:27.

Click to expand...

When Scripture says, "Moses" in both of these cases, then God is talking about the first five books of the OT. "Jewish religious tradition ascribes authorship of the Torah to Moses through a process of divine inspiration." (Wiki). Some among professing Christian denominations think someone helped Moses write the beginning of Genesis, because that makes their bogus interpretations make a bit of sense. I am not buying any of that for one second. :0)

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

I don't know who wrote Genesis, it seems to be a compilation of different books, Gen 5:1 This is the book of the generations of Adam. A lot of work has been put into looking at the different writing styles in the different section of Genesis. But I don't see why I need to come up with a case for anybody else writing the book. You dismissed Iosias' reference to the different traditions with an unsupported claim that Moses wrote Genesis, and you still have not produced any evidence.

When Scripture says, "Moses" in both of these cases, then God is talking about the first five books of the OT. "Jewish religious tradition ascribes authorship of the Torah to Moses through a process of divine inspiration." (Wiki). Some among professing Christian denominations think someone helped Moses write the beginning of Genesis, because that makes their bogus interpretations make a bit of sense. I am not buying any of that for one second. :0)

Click to expand...

Jesus used the common Jewish term 'Moses and the prophets' to describe the old testament, it was also referred to in the NT as 'the Law of Moses and the Prophet' or 'the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms'. When they spoke of 'Moses and the prophets' it did not mean they excluded the book of Psalms, and the term 'Psalms' was not just that individual book but referred to all the wisdom literature including the book of proverbs which are not actually Psalms. The phrase prophets and psalms also included historical chronicles even though they are not actually prophecies or psalms. It was a shorthand.

Referring to the Pentateuch as 'Moses' or 'the Law of Moses' does not mean Moses wrote all of it or even that it is all law, any more than proverbs are actually psalms. Moses did not even write all of Deuteronomy. Who wrote Deut 34:5 So Moses the servant of the LORD died there in the land of Moab, according to the word of the LORD. Even the bible tells us Joshua added to the book of the Law Joshua 24:26 And Joshua wrote these words in the Book of the Law of God.*

So the fact that Jesus used the common phrase 'Moses and the prophets' to refer to the OT does not tell us Moses wrote Genesis or that Jesus was ascribing Moses as its author.

Just how many books of Scripture are co-authored other than Genesis for you?? :0) Good luck. Scripture says,

Click to expand...

Off the top of my head, Psalm and Proverbs, Deuteronomy as I have mentioned. Doing a quick search, Joshua and 2 Samuel refer to a Book of Jasher they draw their information from, Numbers quotes from the Book of the Wars of the LORD. The writer of 1Kings drew on the Book of the Acts of Solomon as well as the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel and the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah, which sound like two distinct books and different from our Chronicles. The writer of Chronicles refers to the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah.

What you don't seem to realise is a writer can do his research read the different books available and quote them or even combine different texts together in a single book, and do it under the inspiration of God. The book of Psalm include psalms written in captivity in Babylon and psalms of David. Clearly David could not have put the book together. It was the work of an editor. Do you think the editor threw the psalms together as best he could, or do you think the order of the book of psalms is inspired by God too?

*Interestingly the OT references from Joshua to Nehemiah are to 'the book of the Law' a single volume rather than the five books Genesis to Deuteronomy we are familiar with, which sounds like the form we are used to has been revised, and well, edited, since the Babylonian exile.

And anywhere from a quarter to a fifth of Romans isn't actually written by Paul, but by the OT writers he quotes. Does that count?

Terral said:

Hi BMN:



None of that priestly Yahwist lingo means anything. Moses wrote the entire book of Genesis by inspiration of God. 2Timothy 3:16-17.

In Christ Jesus,

Terral

Click to expand...

Thank you Terral. I was thinking that this topic may be going to Einstein's Theory of Relativity next, and I couldn't understand it. I tend to stay off of topics where even God might have trouble understanding the verbage Yes, I agree that Moses wrote Genesis inspired by God, and even if you Google that question 99.5 % say Moses wrote it. Pretty good odds I would say

Big Mouth Nana said:

I agree that Moses wrote Genesis inspired by God

Click to expand...

There are a number of problems for arguing that. First of all there is no internal evidence of authorship. Secondly, we need to recognise that Israel was primarily an oral society, that is the stories were passed on orally for generations and these were changed as time went by. In the story of Jacob wrestling with the Angel we are able to find at least three layers of editing alone. Thirdly, what we have in our hands is the final-form of the text, this is quite late in origin. No-one will deny that Moses had an input into the Pentateuch in some form but that Moses wrote Genesis is very doubtful.

You should try How the Bible Became a Book: The Textualization of Ancient Israel by William M. Schniedewind

With Genesis, the different sections refer to themselves as 'genealogy' or 'book of genealogy' but there is no reference to anyone reading, writing or having any kind of book or scroll in the narrative. There were clearly books by the time Genesis was written down, but no suggestion of books at the time of the events described.

However this has changed completely by the time we get to the narratives from Exodus to Deuteronomy, there is repeated reference to the people involved writing things down in books and reading the books out to the nation. If Moses is anything like the bible describes, which I presume he was, then he was a highly educated and culturally sophisticated Egyptian prince (educated in all the wisdom of the Egyptians as Stephen describes him). Moses was probably the best person in early Israelite history to give this written basis to the new nation. But the description of the books in Exodus to Deuteronomy, Moses own Book of the Law where he wrote down what God spoke to him, or the book of the Wars of the Lord, do not match our bible's books Exodus to Deuteronomy. These books contain what Moses wrote in the Book of the Law, but they themselves are not the book the bible describes Moses as writing. Which suggests they are a later composition drawn from the earlier books.

Iosias said:

Secondly, we need to recognise that Israel was primarily an oral society, that is the stories were passed on orally for generations and these were changed as time went by.

Click to expand...

Oral Law is not Chinese Whispers.

There is a reason the Hebrews/Jews have maintained their culture and traditions today despite being displaced for 1400 (?) years, and on many more occasions before that. As a guess they have been without a nation for longer than they have had one. Any other culture once displaced has lost its traditions within a coupe of generations ,but not the Jews. This is because of a very strong tradition of passing down from Father to Son.

From memory a Jewish kid, learns Leviticus off by heart by age of 6 to be accepted into Rabbi School. To get to the next stage which is 12 they have had to be able to recite the entire Torah.

Oral Law is a very strong method to retain the accuracy of the texts. With so many people learning, teaching and correcting it, it would be very difficult for it to be changed.

marktheblake said:

Oral Law is a very strong method to retain the accuracy of the texts.

Click to expand...

I am not saying they were unintentionally changed but that they were intentionally changed over time to deal with specific circumstances.

Iosias, what was the original version then?

marktheblake said:

Iosias, what was the original version then?

Click to expand...

I don't believe that we can retrieve the "original version" but we can note differing traditions within the Pentateuch.

My keen interest is Form Criticism. A brilliant little book is Form Criticism of the Old Testament.

Moses was on Mt Sinai for quite awhile with God. How do any of us know what the conversation was on that mountain, or the revelations that Moses received while in the presence of God? He could have very well received the creation account and not just the tablets. I DO believe that there is significance in the first formed creation and Adam/Eve. If not, it would not have been recorded, as I believe and also others. One aspect of my reasoning could be that it explains the lie that the fallen angels had sex with the women and giants were created. I never did buy into the theroy, and that is what it is. I personally believe that the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:4 were from the first "formed" creation. God never called angels, fallen or otherwise sons of God...Heb 1:5 ~ For unto which of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father, and he shall be to me a Son?
Jude 1:6 ~ And the angels which kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation, he hath reserved in everlasting chains under darkness unto the judgment of the great day. They didn't have time to seduce the women even if they were capable of that lol. Genesis has quite a bit of information in it that Sunday school never thaught us kiddies. Just a little food for thought here on what else is in that book .