Genesis 1:26-27 ESV
Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." [27] So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.
God the Father is clearly not in a physical form throughout the Bible. I believe that's why "graven images" are forbidden in the Ten Commandments, as they'd mislead people into thinking of him as a physical being. God the Father as depicted in the Bible is closer to an omnipresent, omniscient mind that runs the universe as a simulation inside itself and occasionally talks to entities inside the simulation through avatars, dreams, and visions.
Rather, I think "in his own image" there refers to sapience, self-awareness, and creativity - what is called elsewhere in Scripture "the breath of God".
Much of what makes the Incarnation of Christ so meaningful is precisely that God is made man, with hands, feet, head, and heart. He is Emannuel, "God with us," come to debug and repair the system we broke from within, knowing our suffering and giving us the knowledge and strength to help repair it ourselves.
That all loses a lot of its meaning if God the Father is just a big man on a throne in a cloud somewhere (an image that I have never found anywhere in the text and am puzzled as to where it came from). He was always just one of us if that's the case.
So, yeah. Despite apparently sharing your fundamental beliefs about the world, I think you're way off base about why humans walk.
Another "in his image" interpretation I've heard is that it's something of a mistranslation. That it's more like "in his imagination" or "he imagined/conceived us" than "we look like him." That's the one I've always gone by, but I like your take too.
At the beginning of this post (starting from Begin digression), there's an exploration of anthropomorphic metaphors that might interest you: http://www.wall.org/~aron/blog/god-and-time-iv-impassibility...
Also, have you read The Everlasting Man by G.K. Chesterton? It has some ideas found in your comment regarding the Incarnation and it is overall a fun read.
I have read several of Chesterton's books, but I don't think I have ever gotten around to The Everlasting Man. Someday.
I'm not sure if that's what he/she meant or not.
That the God of the Bible doesn't look like a man or woman is clear from the below verse:
"Therefore, watch yourselves closely—since you did not see any form on the day [God] spoke to you...that you may not act corruptly by making for yourselves any carved image having the form of any symbol, the representation of male or female." - Deuteronomy 4:15-16
So, the injunction against creating an image that looked like a man or woman to represent God, would indicate that he does not physically look like a man or a woman.
That's no doubt why it says, "you saw now form"
Reference: https://www.jw.org/en/bible-teachings/questions/god-omnipres...
Also, Dawkins manages to stick to the facts and evidence and almost entirely avoid the religion bashing in this book, making it much more approachable for religious folks.
That refers to free will (which humans have, but animals do not), not physical shape.