Yes.
Would I be correct in saying that they both have a common ancestor (evolutionary speaking)?
Yes.
Would you be more comfortable if I said that you believe we descended from gibbons, orangutans, or apes? Gibbons, no. Orangutans, no. Apes, yes.
Gibbons and orangutans are specific types of apes which are not on the ancestral lineage of human beings. They either arose after the human lineage split off from the rest of the apes, or their own ancestral branch split off from ours before their branch differentiated into gibbons and orangutans.
"Apes", on the other hand, is an all-encompassing term for the "higher" primates, and the human ancestral lineage did indeed diverge from within this larger group.
But I think you may be laboring under a misapprehension. While we did descend from ancestors which could accurately be classified within the ape group, we're *still* apes. Apes of the human variety. Just as we're still primates, still mammals, still vertebrates, and so on.
I just love it when you weigh into these threads! Leftists and Creationists are equally irrational. The most troubling thing is that the Creationists actually believe what they espouse.
The lineage that resulted in gibbons (Hylobates) split off from the common ancestor about 18 million years ago. The orangutan lineage (Pongo) split away at about 14 million years ago, followed by the gorilla lineage about 7 million years ago. The human and chimp (Pan) lineages diverged from a common ancestor about 6 million years ago.
Modern day chimps are no less removed from our most recent common ancestor than are modern humans.
True within scientific usage of the words, but confusing to a layperson. A lot of the smoke an noise on these threads would disappear if people defined their terms, as you just did.
Full Disclosure: If (say) gorillas and the like are great apes, are humans "wonderful" apes? and homosexuals "fabulous" apes?
Cheers!