Jesus was formed of flesh like all mankind, but he also had a divine nature. In like manner, man was formed in commonality with other creatures, but he was endowed with the nature and image of God. To offer these possibilities is to abandon any literal interpretation of the creation account. Fundamentalists claim to interpret the Scriptures literally. That may sound noble, but it is an impossibility.
Simple explanations are comfortable for the unquestioning.
Literal interpretation comes in handy at times to prove presuppositions like six literal days of creation, but it doesn't even support that or instantaneous creation. Good people have been scared out of their senses by the thought that the first three chapters of Genesis might be an allegorical or figurative account of creation intended simply to present God as the Almighty Creator. They have made a certain, theoretical how of creationa matter of scienceinto a tenet of faith essential to salvation. There is continued search for reasons and defenses to uphold the literal concept which shuns evidence on the other side. Let me ask some questions and make observations about the Genesis account which challenge the literal concept.