Your misunderstanding of the synergies between Genesis 1 and 2 is why you have so much else wrong.
You of course are error free ;)
Seriously - if you lived in India you could as well be trying to be too deep and mystical about the bhagavad gita, or if you existed 3000 years ago you may well have hugged a tree and asked for everyone to hear the deep earth mysteries as the ancestors whispered to you. You're as much a cultural product as the next person and you have the unfortunate position of having nothing like the original autographs in your hand , no thorough grasp of the languages and cultures that produced them and to further obfuscate meaning you then add a 2012 Western gloss to it all and try and create a new scriptural form and meaning that is alien to the 4th century onwards copy of copy of hearsay books you claim are communicating such hidden knowledge.
Now if you have another means to approach scripture that is free from the fog of culture and the impossibility of understanding an ancient civilisation as required to divine their motives and meanings, feel free to see if it has any merit or whether it simply returns to the basic - if God chooses you you'll get it and he'll whisper meaning to you secretly and subjectively and then it'll all make sense (in a non repeatable or non- testable or contradicts the facts manner).
Surely proving God shouldn't be this hard.
P.S. You're phrase about me studying religion and not living it is rather silly don't you think?