Yes, exactly. It is another interpretation. You want to argue as if the only two alternatives are a simplistic literal reading of Genesis or a godless random evolution.
I'm not sure why you can't conceive of a middle ground, a God-driven process.
It also begs the question as to why God created life this way. It does seem a bit of a roundabout way to go about manufacturing a vessel worthy of receiving a supernatural "soul."
We covered this yesterday. It is no more "roundabout" than God creating a race of people, letting them fall, flounder about for a while, sending a Redeemer, and then raising them up to Glory with Him. If God's ultimate goal was to have a perfected humanity living in Eternal Union with Him, He sure tokk the scenic route.
Point being that one can not say God does not use processes to acheive His goals.
Evolutionary theory predicts there would be an entire populaton of humans, not just two.
Again, please try to understand that I am not arguing for a random, godless evolution. I have specifically stated otherwise.
If God simply chose a random male and female humaniform hominid and put souls into them
He didn't choose at random. God planned it. You really can't get past this, can you? God planned the first humans by planning the development of their brains and bodies to prepare them for ensoulment.
, what did he do with the rest of the soul-less human-animals that had to be present? Did he kill them? If not, they would also have had soul-less "animal" descendents. Where are they?
There are no "soulless humans." You have a confusion of terms. Other "potentially could have been made human" hominids obviously died out. God no more "killed" them than He killed the dodo or the dinosaur.
Well, since you have God only imbuing souls upon humans that He considers worthy vessels
That He planned and made into worthy vessels. He didn't do it as a reward for these pre-human's merit. Is it that difficult to grasp that God had a plan and then executed it?
No matter how intelligent and reasoning chimp descendents may become, they will remain souless and in no need of a redemption from a fall, I suppose.
If God, at some point in the future, decides to ensoul some type of intelligent chimp, it is no skin off of my nose. Why does it bother you so much? We are laborers in the vineyard. If the Master pays us our wages for a full day, we are not cheated if he pays another the same for a few minutes' work.
As you can see, trying to shoehorn evolutionary theory into traditional Christian theology is an ill fit, at best.
When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. The point is you refuse to incorporate scientific fact into your theological worldview. That's fine, if that's how you want to be.
SD
I get what you're saying:
God created us but made it look like evolution, but it really wasn't.
Translation: I really don't want to look stupid by saying evolutionary theory is bunk, so I'll put God in there and say he created in such a way that it looks exactly like evolutionary theory did it. If evolutionary theory later turns out to be bunk, well, then I can change my scriptural interpretation at that time to fit whatever the prevailing theory of man happens to be. At least I won't be called stupid or foolish or a zealot by the self-proclaimed educated and sophisticated in society.