OK, I have been blessed with some time to go back through the audio and transcribe some of the content I was fairly cryptically (! sorry about that!) asking about in the original post:
“The serpent told Eve that by partaking of the fruit, she would become like God … Eve was tempted to exalt herself, to place herself in a position of importance reserved for God … We were created to live with the Tree of Life, that is, God, at the center of the garden of our lives. When we make the decision to put our will at the center, we displace God with ourselves. In so doing, we exalt ourselves to the point where we are attempting to become our own creators.”
Next, a section hedonism and ego-driven striving being the Genesis “fig leaves” to cover the emptiness of Godlessness.
“The story [of Genesis] ends with angels guarding the way to the tree with a flaming sword. Humankind is denied access. But does the story really end there, with humankind blocked from access to the Tree of Life? … The story resumes [in the book of Matthew]. There, on that tree is the Son of God, and Son of Man, Jesus.”
“Once we recognize that the sword of the Creation story has been snuffed out, and that there is free access to Eden’s Tree of Life, we see why it is hardly legitimate to talk or write about the Creation story without including the story’s ending: the New Creation possible in Jesus. That which we mistakenly consider two stories, is really one.”
So my question really is, is this a mainstream Christian understanding of the Adam and Eve story, and its relationship to the coming of Jesus? Would YECs agree or does reading Genesis as a history textbook preclude such interpretations? The above take resonates well with me but I want to understand the context among competing interpretations.