Is there any counterargument to the idea that the Egg came before the Chicken?

Because almost all genetic mutations that can actually change the genetic structure of the species of the animal take place in gametes after Prophase I of meiosis, the first "Definitive" chicken would've been an egg being sat on by an animal that wasn't a chicken. (I know it's more of a spectrum but at a certain point whether or not the animal has more chicken qualities than non-chicken qualities would dictate this).

Does this make sense? Am I spewing pseudo-knowledge of genetics that can easily be refuted? Or is this the definitive answer? (Other than Genesis, obviously, for those of you who believe it.)

 

The egg has the same development as the "mother" so in-fact, the chicken came before an egg, it just evolved later in it's life to what we've known for years as "chicken".

 

If you believe that everything evolved then you will believe that the Chicken came before the Egg.