I don’t know why you are using Galatians 3:28
The reason I'm using Galatians 3:28 is because both can't be equal in Christ if both aren't "the image of God"; because atonement for sin only applies to those who are created in God's image. There's no salvation plan for fallen angels; they are not material entities as carbon based life is. Thus the rest of the creation is also subject to the redemption plan because of the atonement.
Which angels not being "carbon based" raises an interesting question. Are they actually considered "life forms" or are they just considered some other sentient creation? Now there are "elect angels"; (1 Timothy 5:21). Now how exactly "election" applies to angels who never sinned; I'm not really sure, because election is related to atonement. Which atonement is reserved only for humans.
Woman did not have the original attributes, but man did, and from man she was created. Because of this, woman’s creation is based off of man’s creation. Woman was not created in the image of God. Man was created in the image of God. A woman’s attributes are based on what God had already given man.
Well the attributes of man and woman are actually the same. We are all accountable for our sin. Women are not intellectually inferior to men. All who are redeemed are atoned for as individuals. Christ was born of the seed of the woman. And thus he couldn't have atoned for the sin of men if women were not also included as "man made in God's image".
Look at Adam and Eve before the fall. The "man rule over woman" rule didn't come into play until after the fall. Which I think is why Paul says that in Christ there is no male and female. Both Adam and Eve had equal access to God prior to the fall. Now the interesting thing is in 1 Timothy 2:14 it talks about Eve being deceived but Adam was not. But the first thing Adam should have done was gone to God and said (the proverbial): "Houston we have a problem!" (And both of them should have gone to God as soon as they realized "Eh... we got a talking snake in this garden that's telling us to do bad stuff!"
Which makes me wonder how much Adam knew about the redemption plan (though the fall had not happened yet)? Did Adam know the penalty to make Eve "right" again would have required the shedding of blood; and would he have concluded that would have meant the shedding of his blood. Now obviously we know Adam could not atone for Eve's sin. Adam did not have a Divine nature; he'd never get out of the Lake of Fire. (He's not eternal.) We do know though that of what ever extent of the requirement for atonement Adam had been informed of; he was not deceived when he transgressed.
Yet on the front end of that; neither of the two of them carried out the first commandment that was given to them specifically. (To keep the garden.) The command to "keep the garden" is actually a military term. They were to fortify and protect it. Thus the question as to why neither went to God as soon as the disobedient talking snake showed up.
Again this is why In a marriage Jesus is the head of man, and man is the head of woman - this is based on the order man was created being that it was the man that was created in the image of God, whereas woman was made from man.
This is also why women are to wear a head covering during worship, and men don’t have to. Women are to have power over their head because of the angels, but men don’t have to have power over their heads because they are made in God’s image whereas women are made of man,
1 Corinthians 11:8-10 KJV.
Yet, when Paul declares in Galatians that both are equal in Christ; what does that mean in the parabolic representation of "Christ the head of man / man the head of woman"? Christ is the head of the bride; yet the bride of Christ isn't made up of strictly female humans.
So, there's a parabolic form going on here. 1 Corinthians 11:10 talks about women wearing head coverings "because of the angels". Now what does that mean? I'm not sure; I haven't studied that specific thing out. But the parabolic message is that the authority over the church is Christ. He's the "man" who "covers the head" of the bride. Now there's a lot of debate over what head coverings mean "her hair is given her for a covering". So does that mean that only women who are bald should wear head coverings? Which generally in society; that's what we see anyways. (Female cancer patients generally wear head coverings. They technically don't have to; but they generally do. Interesting!)
The spiritual symbolism of "the woman" not having her head covered means she's not atoned for. She (who claims to be the church) remains in rebellion against God. That's what that symbolism represents. Which probably has some application to angels being a witness to this because the angels who fell; did so before Adam and Eve did.
People are using the Greek language to translate the Bible when it has already been translated. I think this is absolutely wrong. If we are not Greek, don’t speak Greek, can’t write Greek, why are we using Greek to aid in our understanding of the Bible. Apostle Paul warns you about this.
Where does the Apostle Paul warn people about not using the original language? Most Jews in the days of Jesus didn't speak Hebrew; yet the Hebrew OT was used; and quoted in the NT. Now we could get into the differences between the Paleo-Hebrew text of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic text; but that's a whole other ball of wax!
Matter of fact it was probably pre-Tower of Babel "paleo-Hebrew" that was spoken by the apostles at Pentecost in the book of Acts. The language that all foreigners heard in their "tongue of origin". (Where did all human language originate from? What ever that language was that God had communicated to Adam in (from Adam to the tower of Babel) humanity all spoke one language.
"Though I speak with the tongues of men and of angels..." Now is the "tongues" angels speak the original tongue God communicated to Adam in? That's a good question!
Note the Scripture talks about the gift of tongues ceasing but it doesn't say the interpretation of tongues will cease. Interesting, now why is that? (Because the Scripture is "spiritually discerned" and the translation of Scripture is still taking place.) No human language we have is an infallible translation of the Scripture. But the message is still adequately preserved that an accurate representation of the gospel can still be discerned in the human language of the Scripture. And thus because the Book is spiritually discerned; it's still infallible; despite the translations are not perfect. They don't have to be; because the Holy Spirit instructs the believer in the ascertainment of the truth.
Now the angel said that holy thing that shall be born of you, you have said based on the Greek language the angle meant stalk instead of born. And you have determined Mary’s stalk , that is her DNA was converted and cloned some sort of way. However, a baby takes the DNA of both parents. In this instance, God’s Holy seed (and we don know God’s DNA), and Mary’s egg which was fertilized causing her to conceive like all other women who conceive. There was no cloning involved.
Go look up all the words that root is translated as. "Stock" is one of them. "kind", "kindred", "offspring", "nation", "stock", "born" and "diversity"; are other translations of that root word. The first word in the list is the one that it's translated most often as. So Jesus was "of the kind" of Mary.
In the natural progression of conception; the child inherits roughly half of the DNA from the mother and roughly half of it from the father. But theoretically a female child could inherit up to 100% of the DNA from her mother. The reason for this possibility is that the egg already comes with the full compliment of chromosomes prior to fertilization. Humans have 46 chromosomes. An egg has 46 chromosomes. Once it is fertilized, a polar body is expelled of the excess DNA.
Well God is Spirit and male seed is a material thing. A spirit doesn't produce male seed. This is why demons can't make angelic human hybrids. (They don't have the ability to produce material seed. They aren't of the same "kind".) So thus God used "the seed of the woman" to "prepare a body" for Christ. And the fact that there was no male contribution; proved that Eve had to be created in God's image; because if she wasn't, the incarnation would not have been possible. Because the "seed of the woman" was the only material thing the Holy Spirit was working with.
We know from how children are conceived that the DNA of the parents serves as the blueprint of that process. So, it's certainly biologically correct to say that your child comes from your stock.
However we cannot say a woman child is her seed because the seed belongs to males.
Genesis 3:15. There is the "seed of men" and there is the "seed of women". They aren't the same; but women do have seed.
Matter of fact eggs are complete cells and contain all the cell organelles. (This is why you get all your messenger RNA from your mother.) The only thing sperm are made of is DNA, enzymes to breech the cell wall of the egg, mitochondria to propel the tale and a protein coat that holds the DNA inside the body of the sperm. Not even sure you can call sperm a cell per se? Although I believe they still are classified as "cells".
