When did Homo Sapiens become 'in the image of God' ?

Why is the whole 'image of god' thing just a problem for theistic evolutionists? As I understand it, the bible makes the creation of man out to be a unique event separate from the rest of the animals. Yet that being the case, why are apes so much like us both physically and especially genetically? Those who argue against the evidence for evolution suggest genetic similarities result from god creating closely related species from 'the same mould', so why use a primate 'mould' to create humans?As for those in this thread suggesting that the 'image of god' is not describing a physical appearance but is instead relating to some aspects of our nature, what exactly is about our nature that is 'godlike', since in other threads (such as the thread 'Many Christians Lack Responsibility') these same people insinuate that our nature is naturally fallen/sinful?Anyway, if a 'god' does exist, I always tend to think of it along the lines of the monoliths in 2001

Noooo! This is more along the lines of wild musings of a lazy agnostic Anyway isn't scientology the one with all those folk coming to earth, lining up at volcanoes, and getting blown up by nuclear bombs by Ming the Merciless, or whoever? Yes the scifi references just keep on coming

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'

But the godlike qualities you list were supposed to be given when we were first 'created', yet the knowledge of good and evil only came after the eating of the fruit.
Sorry, I realise this is not your personal opinion.