8. Conceptual Masculinity and Femininity themselves are two non-dependent conceptual entities which exist in definition distinct from one another in their form of concept. Genesis depicts in this distinction as a one way creationism dependance akin to the general concept of a complimentary form. This is analogized to that of an artistic nullspace. The validity of this analogy and the assertions of the Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 11:7-9 and 1 Timothy 2:12-15 are upheld by the nature of human observation of human aesthetic beauty by both genders of humanity.

9. The gender inequality present in Jesus statement in John 6:2 affirms a masculine only imparting of the image of God as well as a symbolic line of reasoning behind the Lord's statement, as Divinity being present in Jesus in his person, his reasoning in this statement must be consistent with that of Genesis.

10. The testimony of the death of Abimelech in Judges 9:53-54 indicates by inductive reasoning that the ancient Hebrew People of Israel in the time Judges did believe that man alone and not in woman, bares God's image in one's physical body. It establishes historical precedence that culturally the Ancient People of God believed and interpreted Genesis in such a way that their society at large believed man alone in the male gender bears the image of God in his person. Subsequently, there precedes an exposition of God's purpose and providence in the felling of Abimilech as well as an exploration of Christian symbolism behind that particular occurrence. God's Symbolism is a recurrent theme which presents itself in the course of this continuum argument.

11. Contrary to a belief in coequal gender endowment of God's image in humanity and it's subsequent ramifications, it is seen that God makes and has made distinctions in humanity based on Gender, that God does not see men and women as authoritative equals in their person as is shown the laws and ordinances he gave through Moses in Numbers 30:1-15. In this passage Biblical mandate of authority is granted to fathers and husbands over their daughters and wives in accordance with gender distinction in agreement with the belief of male only endowment of Gods Image contained in Genesis. Through analogy, this and other passages including Jeremiah 31:32, Isaiah 54:5 & 62:5-6, Mathew 9:15, John 21:2 reinforce this assertion.

12. Aristotle's observations in his Book 4 on the History of Animals, Chapter 1 page 608b lines 4-16 concerning the nature of Gender in what Aristotle might term the “human animal”, supports the supposition. Aristotle observes a marked contrast in the virtue of human being beings based on their Gender, observing in the Ancient Gentile World at least that the male half of humanity in a non Judea-Christian society, is markedly the more noble and virtuous of the two sexes. Though the works of Aristotle are a separate entity from that of the Holy Bible, it is maintained that he and other fundamental influential Ancient Greek Philosophers who preceded him were not exclusively free agents of Jehovah's Hand upon the world and thus were not independent of God's providence as it is maintained that they were established within history by a divinely omniscient God to elevate the rhetorical and philosophical reasoning capacities of the Hellenistic world to an extremely sophisticated level. Such would in the centuries to follow allow many Hellenistic Gentiles to be prepared receive adoption in God's Kingdom through the Spirit in the Lord Jesus Christ through the means of the New Covenant relationship to God in line with philosophical reasoning and preaching of the Apostle Paul and all other missionary endeavors of 1^st century Christians of the Apostolic Era. Furthermore, at least in his tutelage of Alexander again through God's providence,

Aristotle is at least possibly influential in some degree in the fulfillment of Old Testament prophesy concerning the conquests of Alexander of Macedonia foretold in Daniel 8, Daniel 8:4-8 & 8:21-22. His works and his observations cannot so easily be dismissed as separate from the perception of reality in a Judea Christian Religious belief system, and therefore of no pertinent correlation to the Holy Bible. His work is appreciated and is certainly relevant to this continued argument as it pertinently enhances the weight of this arguments evidence from a uniquely Christianity neutral perspective.