Since the foundation of your argument appears to be scripture (meaning, the Old and New Testaments), you should be aware that Genesis 1:26 says “image and likeness.” That is duplication.
There is an assumption – a logical one – that someone or something must be the original Creator; in other words, the universe, life, etc. did not just develop spontaneously; there had to be a source, a catalyst.
But, you run into trouble when you assign actions to someone or something that you have no evidence are responsible for those actions.
If your premise assumes that God did indeed create the universe; what is your evidence of that? Is it that same scripture? Which was written by Man? Scripture is a wealth of contradictions. If your God is the God of scripture, you have a lot of explaining to do.
There are other religions and beliefs that claim that THEIR deities created the universe, or life, or both; and do not assert that Man was created in the image and likeness of their deities. You assume that your claim is the right one. So, trot out your proof of that, as well.
Because, as has been said by philosophers and scientists for millennia, a claim that can be made without evidence and can be dismissed without evidence. If your evidence is scripture, then you are in trouble.
In summary: Your belief may be right for YOU; it does not mean that it is FACT, or is right for others.
One of the most prominent intellectual errors of our day is in the belief system often called “evidentialism,” which describes a conviction that knowledge can only be attained through sensory experience of concrete details.
The error is that this system ignores the function of intuition, which is where the bulk of our knowledge originates. Intuition is closely related, if not equivalent to what philosophers call “properly basic belief.”
For example, your belief that the objects in front of you are real, rather than hallucinations, is properly basic. But you can’t prove, to yourself or to anyone else, that those objects are not hallucinations.
Belief that God created everything is properly basic. And contrasting beliefs are historically quite rare. In fact, atheism itself, though still uncommon, didn’t gain a following of higher than 1% of the world population until men like Darwin and Freud came along with what were essentially fairly weak intellectual foundations which had to be sold through prominence of stature and personality rather than strength of argument.
The only reason anyone claims not to believe in the traditional God is in their desire to make their own rules. If they were to admit God is real, then they would have to deal with God’s moral law.