@KKeathley IS a really important voice.
However, I personally see so clearly how a sequential reading clears all of this up, and am rather baffled at why it doesn’t seem to even be considered as a viable option by good scholars whom I admire. The weird thing is, their textual counterarguments are all on shaky contextual and lexical grounds!
The rationale Walton uses to promote a sequential view of reading the first two chapters in light of each other can be unpacked from a lot of other things he has to say.
I, personally, came to this view independently of Walton, by studying the Hebrew words and discourse more closely.
Pretty sure @jongarvey is in that same camp, or at least ballpark.
Adam and Eve are specially chosen, specially situated, bear special guilt for what they brought upon the rest of “Imago Dei” humanity, but the Scriptures do not say that God “created” them, specifically. That they were made of dust does not deny their continuity with humanity at that time who were outside the garden, as it doesn’t for Job when he exclaims "‘Remember now, that You have made me as clay; And would You turn me into dust again? Did You not pour me out like milk And curdle me like cheese; Clothe me with skin and flesh, And knit me together with bones and sinews? You have granted me life and lovingkindness; And Your care has preserved my spirit.’ - Job 10:9-12 NASB
Though “formed of dust,” he was also born normally to a human mother.
The “deep sleep” the LORD puts Adam into is for a revelatory dream or vision, not for (or, at least, not JUST for) physical surgery. Read Walton on this particular point.
Colloquial and theological language abounds in these early writings, without detracting from their historicity.
Cheers!