>I have heard that some people think it doesn't matter if it was an ape's
>body that the "soul" was given to. But there is nothing like that in
I don't know what you define as an ape, but the body of Australopithecus, H.
habilis, H. erectus and Neanderthal are all quite modern in appearance.
Australopithecus was fully bipedal and left footprints in an ash bed which
are identical to modern footprints. This was 3+ million years ago at Laetoli.
The skulls of H. erectus and Neanderthal had morphological differences, but
a large percentage of them had brain sizes which fit into the range of
modern humans--900 cc to 2000 cc. (Neanderthal's brains were bigger than
ours) They also showed an enlarged Broca's area in their brains and that is
associated with speech.
H. erectus made spears, crossed the ocean 700,000+ years ago, left a few
pieces of art.I know of no ape that walks upright and talks and engages in
art. So which one of these species would you conclude is "ape"?
>Genesis 1&2 describe God creating a man, forming him fully and empowering
>him, and then a woman made especially for him. Beautiful. Against such
>there is no law (yet).
Where does it say in the Bible that god created man like H. sapiens?
Man is defined by bearing the image of God.
Foundation, Fall and Flood