Are you suggesting that the Genesis account indicates that God created man as totally different from the rest of creation ? I don't have this impression when reading it, although it mark a difference between humans and the animals. But it isn't that much of a separate event from the rest of the animals, making man on the 6th day with the rest of the mammals etc.
Well I suppose it depends which genesis story you base this all on. As you know in genesis 2, man is created first from dust before any animals, yet as you point out, in the first genesis story humans are created after their kind along with the rest of the land creatures after their kind on day six (of course some mammals were created on the fifth day i.e. whales and bats
). I guess it is open to interpretation, but because you specifically singled out theistic evolutionists, I assumed you thought of humans as a separate created 'kind'. In other words, if the 'image of god' thing is not referring to physical attributes, but is instead related to some part of our psychology, then there would be
no difference between gifting it to an evolved ape at the appropriate time or choosing a created kind from day six. Hence the bad analogy to the 2001 monoliths.
Anyway I did not want to have a debate about this, since it would probably derail your topic. It was more an interest in creationist opinions for a query which I've been thinking about for a while. I would still be interested in a reply to the more on topic parts of my post i.e. what does the 'image of god' thing refer to if it is not physical?
Edited by Malcolm, : Should have been 'no difference'