Look, evolution says that man's moral and intellectual faculties, as well as his mind and his religion, evolved from apes. And, in addition, man's mind is only different from that of apes in degree, not in kind. Do you get the import of this? What does Orthodoxy teach about man's moral and intellectual powers? That they evolved by small improvements from apes?
Last I checked, evolution is a fact about allele frequencies varying over time, and a theory of evolution is an attempt to explain this phenomenon and derive other consequences about biology from it.
The fact that arrogant materialists who have not a clue why consciousness exists at all make stupid assertions about the human mind, and purport to derive its properties from their favored theory of evolution is not interesting from either a scientific or theological standpoint.
Seeing that we and they have no idea how mind and brain are related, why are you crediting their conceit?
And why do you insist on the gradualist version of neo-Darwinism as a straw-man, when the fossil record really supports Gould’s punctuated equalibrium version? And why, pray tell, do you think that the dynamics of evolution has nothing akin the phase transitions in other dynamical systems, so that it can only produced differences of degree, rather than of kind?
Read Alexander Kalomiros’s piece if you want an answer to how an Orthodox Christian can resolve the seeming antinomy between creation and evolution. He sets it forth much better than I will. Of course, to be fair Fr. Seraphim Rose was also throughly Orthodox and was plainly a creationist (though not a naive Biblical literalist, since no Orthodox Christian is with regard to any matter addressed in the Holy Scriptures).
I would observe that only those variants of Christianity that arose since the 1500’s and seem to think that Christianity is an ideology founded on a text, rather than a way of life founded on a Person, seem to have a problem with this: vast majorities of Orthodox, Latins (and the Latin Church, since they have a centralized magisterium, and we know the Pope’s view on the matter), Anglicans, Copts, Armenians, and Assyrians, don’t seem to have the problem you Protestants (or ‘Biblical Christians’ or whatever your preferred self-designation is) do. For that matter a lot of Protestants don’t.
Why precisely do you think that Blessed Augustine of Hippo erred when he concluded that the first two chapters of Genesis could not be literally true? (I would note that St. Gregory of Nyssa was of the same mind, calling them “doctrines in the guise of a narrative,” as were the medieval Jewish sages Maimonides and Nachmanides.)