Ezekiel 1:26 “And above the firmament that was over their heads was the likeness of a throne, as the appearance of a sapphire stone: and upon the likeness of the thro

Mathew 11:25 “At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, ... ”

Mathew 11:25 to pick a very clear example, very clearly illustrates that Jesus is unmistakably speaking to God in the first person as a Father and thereby also as a masculine being. If God's image were Feminine would Jesus be addressing God as “O Father”? The induction is self evident. It is seemingly impossible fathoming within the realm of reason that Jesus Christ believed that God in the First Person possessed a Feminine image to go along with his Paternal Masculine Nature and Title.

To concisely close out this line of reasoning as has already been shown, that it is the case that only one or the other is true, that God posses either A.) a Masculine Image or B.) a Feminine Image, and since it has been demonstrated by the inerrant Holy Bible that God posses an eternal unchanging Masculine Image, one can conclude that God does not posses a Feminine Image without further argument. Therefore, God' Image is the Masculine Image of Man given to Man in Adam, and to Man alone in Adam through inheritance.

Now if one will still maintain that Woman in Eve was made in the image of God, one has to extrapolate how a flawless and perfect Holy God creates her in his Masculine Image and likeness as the Feminine being that she is noting that God and his divine works are not arbitrary and neither is the Holy Bible.

What has been seen so far that their has been an attempt to assert that Woman in Eve was made in God's Image and that all woman are made in God's image based upon Genesis 1:27. However, it has already been pointed out in prior argument that the verse, Genesis 1:27, literally infers itself as it reads. One.), God originally created the man, the male gender, in the appearance of his physical manifestation, God's image, and the pronouncement is repeated twice for emphasis. “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him;” Two.), God originally created the human race to be or to exist in creation in the form of 2 genders, male and female. “male and female created he them.”

Genesis 1:27 - “So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.”

Though I have not yet seen it enacted, I suppose one might try to claim that Genesis 5:1-2 affirms that woman was made in God's Image by God.

Genesis 5:1-2 - “This is the book of the generations of Adam. In the day that God created man, in the likeness of God made he him; Male and female created he them; and blessed them, and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”

Herein, nothing new has been added to Genesis 1:27 assuage that Woman is also created in the Image of God. There is still the same two logically independent statements though not unrelated in creationism as is maintained in Genesis 1:27. What has been added is that originally God blessed humanity in Adam as is stated in the Genesis 1:26 whereby Man is blessed to have dominion over all the earth as also is seen by Genesis 5:2 “...and blessed them,...”. Also, that humanity would be defined through inheritance (brokenness, inequity, sickness, and death through and as a consequence of original sin included as God and God's design is not arbitrary) and named through the first man Adam as the race of Man, humanity and mankind, as seen by Genesis 5:2 “... and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created.”.

Again, the Apostle Paul shows himself to be in agreement with this understanding of

Genesis 5:1-2 as his reasoning asserts as much in inheritance of the first man Adam and original sin in 1 Corinthians 15:45-49.

1 Corinthians 15:49 - “And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit. Howbeit that was not first which is spiritual, but that which is natural; and afterward that which is spiritual. The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven. As is the earthy, such are they also that are earthy: and as is the heavenly, such are they Also that are heavenly. And as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly.”

What does help in Genesis Chapter 5 is that the Bible gives further indication of how the image of God was originally to be abstracted in human inheritance.

Genesis 5:3 “And Adam lived an hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth:”

Here the Bible shows a particular instance near the beginning of mankind in which the image of God is received through birth via means of inheritance from fathers to their sons as Seth was begotten of Adam and was thereby made in the image of Adam through whom he inherits the image of God. Again no mention here or anywhere else in the Bible, that a daughter was born in the image of God via inheritance from Adam or even from Eve, that is if one maintains that she was created in the image of God in the first place.

It is established via Genesis 5:3 that the Godly intention of design is that the Image of God was originally established by intended precident from eans of inheritance from Fathers to Sons from fathers to their sons just as Seth was begotten of Adam and was thereby made in the image of Adam through whom he inherits the image of God. Historically it appears as time extends further from Eden so do the implications of original sin. Herein, the intended fundamental principles of Godly design is demonstrated and not the present day macro reality of present day genetic design of trait inheritance by composite of both parents wherein there is both grace and original sin present. Thankfully, yet in his grace God makes all things new.

A side point is that the dynamicism present in the shift away from the purity and simplicity of Genesis design to the present day ramifications of human genetic design delineates a primary principle of change in the reality of human existence in the course of history. It is that according to Biblical principles of reality that the physical properties and laws found not only in human genetics, physicality, etc. but also that the nature and bounds of physical reality itself are seen as likely influenced by the abundance and lack of the spiritual presence of God and as that presence waxes and wanes, such physical laws of science (for example, perhaps in radioactive decay observed in Carbon 14 dating, etc.) are not entirely constant from age to age though likely unnoticeable to the mass consensus of humanity. It is marked by degradation of Genesis design in original sin and the healing presence of God in Grace in the World now manifested through the works of the Savior, Jesus Christ. Also, such reasoning presents itself as a means of inductive segway to explain how it is possible for the miracles of God recorded in the Biblical timeline, ranging the span of Genesis to the spiritual gifts of the Apostolic era in early Christian history, as such being supernatural defy the rationality of science and its fundamental laws, how such are deemed to have been present in the world in the past, but not so much presently observed in the modern era officially.

If one would attempt to dissuade this point by maintaining the argument that just because it is not recorded in the Bible that the image of God is transported to daughters of humanity through birth, that this does not preclude it from being so, then in response to that line of reasoning, it would be asserted that God's ways are higher in purpose, design, and foresight than humanity (Isiah 55:9-11), and that God does not insert passages into his Bible arbitrarily or without purpose. Also, that the same goes for that which is omitted from the Bible, that such omissions are likewise divinely purposeful. One such omission would that the notion that daughters receive the image of God in birth via means of inheritance from Mother or even from their Father. In this case for good reason, because as we are repeatedly observing through cumulative reasoning that Woman even in her feminine humanity does not by divine design posses the masculine image of God, that such a notion is contradictory with other portions of the Holy Bible including 1 Corinthians 11:7-9 and 1 Timothy 2:12-15.