A union with dour consequences: Theistic Evolution

[First Man:] I think, I think I am, therefore I am, I think.
[Establishment:] Of course you are my bright little star,
I've miles
And miles
Of files
Pretty files of your forefather's fruit
and now to suit our
great computer,
You're magnetic ink.
[First Man:] I'm more than that, I know I am, at least, I think I must be.
[Inner Man:] There you go man, keep as cool as you can.
Face piles
And piles
Of trials
With smiles.
It riles them to believe
that you perceive
the web they weave
And keep on thinking free.
"In the Beginning" is a 1969 song written by Moody Blues drummer Graeme Edge

There is a story in the Old Testament where a prophet challenged the people of Israel. Elijah asked, “How long are you going to waver between two opinions? If the Lord is God, follow him! But if Baal is God, then follow him!” New Living Translation, I Kings 18:21
This has always seemed to be the funny part of this story. In the language of the Old Testament, it seems to draw a picture of a person who is trying to decide in which direction to go, but winds up running in circles going no where. This seems to be a good example of those people who want to be a part of the Christian community, but cannot find themselves willing to be unsophisticated and not try to reconcile a Supreme Being and Darwinian evolution.
Why would anyone try to put these two in the same boat? Maybe it is to drown one of them while no one is looking. How could someone hope to put two eternal beings together? If matter is eternal, producing life from non-life, then why would there be a need for another eternal being to manipulate what the other god had created? That seems to be a conflict of interest. Wouldn’t these two be after each other to decide who was the best?
This is the problem facing those called Theistic Evolutionists. They seem to have difficulty in deciding what authority to believe and to base their worldview on. On the one hand they seem to want to believe in a source for which they can receive eternity. But, they struggle with the supposed truth of Darwinian Evolution. They see the obvious record of fossils and geology. They interpret this record in the supposed enlightened writings of a man dissatisfied with God and Christianity.
Because of this conflict between two sources, the Bible and Darwin, they have come up with an approach that will assuage guilt by totally accepting one of these competing paradigms over the other. God did create everything in its most primitive form, they say. He created natural matter and left it to develop at its own pace over billions of years. This is a good start by the Theistic Evolutionists. They do remove one of the competitors. Obviously, there must be only one God.
They leave the task of molding that created matter to lifeless, soulless natural processes. They have to give Darwin and the neo-Darwinists their due, even though they write and research with an anti-supernatural bias.
This is not all. Theistic Evolutionists must keep God involved, or someone might think that He is dead. According to them, God lets Nature (Should we say, “Mother Nature”.) run its course until it messes up. He then steps in with His creative touch, does a little correcting, and steps back again to allow His assistant to carry on. God, with His creative specialty, becomes “the God of the gaps”. What is this? This is a way to explain phenomena that cannot be explained by the prevailing scientific knowledge of the moment. The weakness in this approach is that God will surely loose His grip on this universe as more and more theories are conjured up to explain reality.
The real weakness in this approach to seating these two antagonists at the same table can be found in examining statements by a proponent of each position. We all have an idea of what Darwin saw and said. If life came from non-life, developed into man by fortuitous accidents (All species did), and mankind is no more special than any other form of life, then evolution must remain the only agent in man’s future (Man's future will eventually run out, but something else will be ‘King of the hill’).
Now let us see what the other witness has to say. Jesus said, “Haven't you read the Scriptures…They record that from the beginning God made them male and female.” New Living Translation, Matt. 19:4
It seems that Jesus believed the creation account of Genesis. If he believed that part of Genesis, then he probably believed that God created man from dirt. Jesus did not say that after the amoeba formed in the ooze, the fish climbed out of the sea, and the monkey climbed up in the tree, God stepped in and coaxed this being into man (Processes that took millions of years).
If this statement by Jesus from the Book of Matthew is not true, what else is not true? Can the Virgin birth, the Resurrection, or the Second Coming be true? Who decides? The revelation of God to man, as recorded in the Bible, must be all true. If there is any chance that Jesus was wrong, or misleading, mankind will find itself going around in circles, just as that prophet said.
Oh, yes! Just think of what this could do to Christmas. This could be bad for the season.