Does the shift in creation verbs between Genesis 1 and 2 allow for a modern interpretation?

I’m a Christian, but I’m asking here because I really appreciate how this tradition embraces multiple layers of interpretation when reading the text.

I recently saw a video where a rabbi pointed out something I hadn’t noticed before: in Genesis 1, the text says God “created” the heavens, the earth, the great sea creatures, and humanity. But in Genesis 2, it says God “formed” the man from the dust of the ground. The rabbi didn’t elaborate, but it got me thinking.

Could that change in language suggest a different process? Maybe that the human body was shaped from already existing matter—possibly even from previous living forms—and then completed with the breath of life? It struck me as a way to consider the idea of evolution within a theological framework.

I’m curious how this kind of reading might be received. Would it be considered a valid or interesting interpretation within traditional or modern frameworks, or is it too speculative?

Thanks in advance.