Depends on what you mean by "non-literal". If by "literal" you're referring to defining each word by its primary meaning, regardless of context and/or alternative definitions, then Genesis is going to fall apart internally, before being compared with Christ's nature.
But, if by "non-literal" you mean viewing Genesis as simply an analogy (and not as a historical account with deeply embedded allegorical meanings), then you're going to make a mockery out of the entire Bible, because the rest of the Bible, including Jesus’ comments, treat it as an historical account.
Both of the above approaches (being too literal, or being too non-literal) are extreme and lead to irreconcilable contradictions, either internally or holistically.
