This further investigation starts by establishing that God's Image is Masculine in Christianity, for the sake of a thorough argument and this investigation, though it be contradictory with the Holy Bible, we define by that which is logically possible and not that which actually is, all the possible subsets in which God's Image could possibly be conceived to exist within existence, within the confines of the real and the possible. The universal distastefulness of this exercise, only further exemplifies the point that there is a generally a universal sense decency, and that God is a Masculine being and his image is in fact Masculine, and it is physically possessed in design in the male gender of humanity only.

The subsets contained solely within the realm of conceptual possibility and according to no other restriction are that God could posses in his image;

A.) a Masculine Image

B.) a Feminine Image

C.) a Hermaphroditic Image

D.) an Asexual Bipedal Humanistic Image not characterized by gender

E.) a Symbolic, non-Human Image such as in the form of a symbol, object, creature, or materialistic thing (non-material things such as concepts would be excluded in this particular subset as they would not present an image)

F.) no Image at all

G.) an Image of Variance, a Dynamic changing Image which could vary at any given time according to any and all combinations of subsets specified in in A.) through F.)

Using the Holy Bible, one can eliminate the extraneous subsets to arrive at the correct Image of God as conveyed by the Word of God and orthodox Christianity itself.