Are Evolution and Christianity Completely Incompatible?

[Excited Penguin]

...


But if you read the bible allegorically, then there is no reason whatsoever to reject evolution.

...

But what then, is the garden of eden?  What does the garden of eden represent?  What of original sin?  How can the allegory make any sense at all if evolution is true?  And how could evolution be compatible with a good, omnipotent, omniscient god?  Evolution is brutal and nasty, and any being that chose that method to make something either is incapable of something better (so not omnipotent) or just does not mind a lot of suffering (so not good at all).

It seems to me that the only way one could suppose that evolution is compatible with the Bible, even just taking the Bible as metaphorically true, is to not pay attention to any of the details or think it through.

What I have noticed is people saying "metaphor" and "allegory" and then simply ignoring what the stories say altogether.  You can see that in this thread:

https://atheistforums.org/thread-34389.html

When a story is an allegory, the story still says whatever it says, and one must make sense of it somehow, or it fails as an allegory.

Let me be the Keanu Reeves to your Al Pacino for a second.

God could be both good and all powerful[these qualities would be irrelevant though] but would want to give nature a chance of making itself work, instead of just manipulating it into whatever form he wants it to take. Besides, that would be impossible to do, since he couldn't want anything in particular, given how he would be the only thing in existence before Creation. He could only ever know himself and nothing else. Therefore God is, in fact, the universe itself. We are God. That, or he found a way to create something out of nothing, in other words, something independent of and wholly different from but at the same time caused by him.

At least that's the only thing that would make sense from a theistic/deistic/apatheistic/pantheistic/atheistic POV. But then God would be, at the same time, irrelevant and redundant, by definition, since he would have divorced himself form existence at the single point called the Big Bang. The Big Bang was, in fact, God. This is what all the fuss is actually about. This is why people have this religious need. We, as people devout to science, on the other hand, see the Big Bang from another perspective, and this is why theists are ridiculous to us. We are moths that are too close to the flames to understand what they might look like from afar. But the butterflies carry on bathing themselves in the sun, prefferring the distant approach to our close one. There need evolve a new group of  Lepidoptera, a sort of crossover between atheists and theists - apatheists. Atheists who are pantheistically theistic.