Is evolution compatible with Christianity? It would seem this is a million dollar question, and also one that nearly everyone has an opinion on these days (usually a very strong opinion).
But, are we really asking the optimal question here? I believe there is a better, and more helpful, way to frame the conversation about evolution & Christianity. When one asks "is evolution 'compatible' with Christianity" many Christians will simply interpret this as a challenge, and it's one they will very often willingly accept, "in defense of the faith". To the believer the question then becomes "can you think of a way that evolution and Christianity could both be true?". The hidden implication is that, if it can be demonstrated evolution and Christianity don't irrefutably contradict one another, the believer has won the argument and Christianity remains true, as if that were automatically the case by default. (This is a category error, but that's a whole different discussion.)
As such, I think a better way to frame the question is something along these lines..."Does the fact of evolution make Christianity less probable, more probable, or does it have no effect?". Or, perhaps, "if evolution is true, does it make Christianity any less likely?". I think the answer, to this latter question, is "yes". Evolution may not disprove Christianity (although, as it happens, I think a reasonable case could actually be made for this), but it does diminish the likelihood of Christianity. There are two points I'd like to make in this area...
1) Firstly, Christian theology is inexorably tied to the creation story in Genesis.
According to the Christian narrative, sin entered the world through the fall of Adam. God, being perfect and holy, cannot look upon sin, so he sent Jesus to take our place, satisfying his wrath and allowing mankind to be reconciled to himself. But, what if Adam & Eve never even existed? This is precisely what scientists now believe. (Christianity Today has an excellent 8 page article, on how Christian theologians are currently grappling with this new problem, right here. It's worth a read.)
As it happens, the difficulties are yet deeper still, because both Jesus and the apostle Paul believed in a historical Adam. Listen to Paul, in Romans 5..."Therefore, just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people...death reigned from the time of Adam to the time of Moses, even over those who did not sin by breaking a command, as did Adam, who is a pattern of the one to come...For if the many died by the trespass of the one man, how much more did God’s grace and the gift that came by the grace of the one man, Jesus Christ, overflow to the many!...For if, by the trespass of the one man, death reigned through that one man, how much more will those who receive God’s abundant provision of grace and of the gift of righteousness reign in life through the one man, Jesus Christ!".
This leads believers straight into the middle of a very sticky conundrum...is the New Testament wrong, or are modern day scientists wrong?? Sadly, many Christians will see this as another opportunity to take a stand for Jesus (so they will reject the science, without so much as a nagging doubt about the validity of their faith).
2) Secondly, if evolution is true, why didn't God send Jesus sooner?
Christopher Hitchens has made this point many times, in his public talks, and here's one example...
I can't say it any better than Christopher, so I'll leave that one right there.
There are many other relevant issues, along this same theme, such as the intense (and pointless) suffering that animals go through. Sure, Christians believe that we live in a "fallen world", but does God not care about the unspeakable suffering of animals? (What did they do to deserve this?)
Let's circle back to where we started..."Is evolution compatible with Christianity?" Well, not really, but I suppose one could try and make it so via strenuous and creative arguments (and many do just that). But it's sort of like shoving a square peg into a round hole...you might get it in there, eventually, but that still doesn't mean it's supposed to go there (and both the square and hole will get damaged in the process).
One need not prove something impossible in order for it to become improbable (even highly so). In my observation there are many Christians who utterly fail to understand this key distinction.