Peter even in his time described those who would be the scoffers who would deny that the Flood itself ocurred.
Nothing new here. The evolutionist challenges both Moses and Christ. When he challenges Christ, he challenges the deity of Christ, as well. So it all boils down to this: either Jesus Christ is the Creator-God (as outlined in the Gospel of John), or random chance is the creator god.
For one who is a Christian, the choice is clear. Theisitic evolution does not merit consideration for those who adhere to what Moses wrote (as inspired by the Creator-God) or to what Christ, the Creator-God himself, is quoted as saying. Those who choose not to believe Christ (as many agnostics on these threads do not) will be inclined to believe in anything else but Christ.
LOL! Usually it's "pure random chance." But even "random chance," well, what the heck is that anyway? I mean, I can't imagine how it has anything to do with evolution, but then I don't understand what it is supposed to mean, so maybe I'm wrong?
Who made you the Supreme Arbiter of Christian Doctrine?
Theistic evolution makes more sense than many creationist myths.
As a matter of fact, the largest Christian denomination, the Roman Catholic Church, does not agree with your narrow, condemnatory viewpoint.
The Catholic Position
Concerning biological evolution, the Church does not have an official position on whether various life forms developed over the course of time. However, it says that, if they did develop, then they did so under the impetus and guidance of God, and their ultimate creation must be ascribed to him.
Concerning human evolution, the Church has a more definite teaching. It allows for the possibility that man’s body developed from previous biological forms, under God’s guidance, but it insists on the special creation of his soul. Pope Pius XII declared that "the teaching authority of the Church does not forbid that, in conformity with the present state of human sciences and sacred theology, research and discussions . . . take place with regard to the doctrine of evolution, in as far as it inquires into the origin of the human body as coming from pre-existent and living matter—[but] the Catholic faith obliges us to hold that souls are immediately created by God" (Pius XII, Humani Generis 36). So whether the human body was specially created or developed, we are required to hold as a matter of Catholic faith that the human soul is specially created; it did not evolve, and it is not inherited from our parents, as our bodies are.
While the Church permits belief in either special creation or developmental creation on certain questions, it in no circumstances permits belief in atheistic evolution.
Pope John Paul II in his own words:
Taking into account the state of scientific research at the time as well as of the requirements of theology, the encyclical Humani Generis considered the doctrine of "evolutionism" a serious hypothesis, worthy of investigation and in-depth study equal to that of the opposing hypothesis. Pius XII added two methodological conditions: that this opinion should not be adopted as though it were a certain, proven doctrine and as though one could totally prescind from revelation with regard to the questions it raises. He also spelled out the condition on which this opinion would be compatible with the Christian faith, a point to which I will return.
Today, almost half a century after the publication of the encyclical, new knowledge has led to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis. It is indeed remarkable that this theory has been progressively accepted by researchers, following a series of discoveries in various fields of knowledge. The convergence, neither sought nor fabricated, of the results of work that was conducted independently is in itself a significant argument in favor of this theory.