Certain discoveries of science, throughout history, have posed challenges to the way Christianity has understood the world. That doesn't mean the science is satanic. Christian theologians, for example, used to believe that heliocentrism was a satanic plot, and the Church tried punishing scientists for spreading the idea. Finally, they had to relent, and then found that it wasn't nearly the obstacle to Christian faith that they had feared.
Same with evolution. It's not. It's only an obstacle to a sort of faith that's based solely on a childish reading of the Bible, one where God literally took some mud and molded it (presumably with his "hands") into the shape of a man, then blew on it to make Adam. That's what's called metaphor. It's not necessary to understand it literally in order to be a believing Christian. The Bible is full of metaphor. "Unless a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God" doesn't mean you have to reenter your mother's womb and come out again, for example. They are throughout the Old and New Testaments.
Except that one was clearly intended to be a metaphor and the other wasn’t. Why believe anything if you don’t take what the Bible says on face value?
See Jesus wasn’t literally resurrected, it’s just a metaphor.
No, the sun didn’t stop while there was a battle, that’s just a metaphor.
No, Jesus wasn’t born of a virgin, that’s just a metaphor.
God, didn’t talk to Abraham, that is just a metaphor.
Even if you take Genesis metaphorically, that isn’t what you are doing. It is quite clear that God was involved at every step of creation. If that is a metaphor, it is a metaphor for a very hands on God who intelligently designed and directed creation as opposed to the one you espouse who stood back and watched it all happen without any intervention whatsoever.
