I would say that:
-
Humans are supposed to behave according to the precept:
Humans are accountable for killing other humans, but are allowed to use non-human animals for food. -
This precept cannot obviously be the product of evolution but requires an explicit intervention of God, as it is referred to in Genesis 9:3-6.
-
Accordingly, this intervention marks the moment when “humans were created as humans” and defines the beginning of humanity (as it is stated in Genesis 5: 1-2). So it cannot be said that “humans were created as humans” by evolution: It requires some intervention coming from outside biology.
-
Nonetheless in order humans can live according to this precept it is necessary that humans can unambiguously distinguish which creatures are humans and which creatures are not humans. Otherwise the precept would have been nonsensical.
-
This distinction is possible today because there is a sharp gap between humans and our nearest “relatives” (chimps and bonobos).
-
God prepared this gap by means of evolution, by provoking the disappearance of a huge number of intermediate varieties between humans and chimps/bonobos.
-
The difference between humans and non-human animals became as sharp as it is today at about 12,000BC. Thus God’s “creation and definition of humans as humans” happened only after this time.
Consequently, it holds both:
-
Humans are created as humans at the moment God declares to make humans in God’s image and gives the precept referred to in Genesis 9:3-6.
-
But in order humans can coherently behave according to this precept, God used evolution to create a clear difference between humans and non-human animals.
In other words:
Genesis helps us to understand why evolution worked the way it worked, and evolution helps us to a better understanding of Genesis.
In view of this, I dare to ask:
Why do you remain reluctant to accept evolution?