Quite who Jesus is in your interpretation is a mystery. “He is not himself the Creator, but he plays an instrumental role in an act of creation”. So at the very least, he was present at creation (or at “an act of creation” - whatever that mysteriously means). So who is he? Not God, not Creator yet pre-existent, not under the curse - there are sufficient assumptions here to fill a systematic narrative theology. Where in the O.T. narrative is anything like this suggested?
I thought I had made a fairly orthodox statement there. Where is it suggested in the Old Testament? Proverbs 8:22-31, surely.
The huge strength of the traditional interpretation is that it was God’s suffering and God’s sacrifice which made atonement for sin, and this in itself highlights the depth and extent of sin as universal problem, something which is absent from your interpretation.
This is very bad theology. An Adam christology solves your problem quite adequately.