Your answers either completely miss the kernel of my proposal or they only beg your original premise - evolution. As such, they are insufficient to remove it.
Here’s why my proposition is a good one and requires a serious answer.
- Genesis 6. There is no way in words to capture the wickedness of the pre-Flood world. God’s cup of wrath was quickly filled. He poured out regret and issued a drop-dead date that he would wipe the slate and start again.
- Sexual aberration appeared and grew wanton. Men with men/women with women. Worship of animals. Romans 1.
- Without question, beastiality was occurring or why the laws condemning it? And the laws recur to drive home the point: Ex 22, Lev 18, Lev 20, Deut 27.
- One instance of cross-breeding had already occurred and was highly successful – sons of God and daughters of men producing men of renown. Men mighty in deed and, undoubtedly, mighty in wickedness.
Proposal: Unlike the genetic limitations of the sexual union of a normal man and beast, if this wicked pre-Flood offspring were to join sexually with beasts, the result may have been the very image of man in complete rebellion against God – apes, chimps, bonobos, in near-human genetic make-up and appearance. Not our ancestors by any stretch, but rather, the ugly offspring and descendants of our total human depravity.
I have given you ample biblical context for this proposal, unlike evolution, for which there is not even a biblical whisper. If you do not sufficiently eliminate this proposal as a viable explanation for the human-ape genome similarity, you will be in denial of its threat to you. You will have been remiss in your duties to your party line.