You said that evolution would not destroy the narrative of Christianity, but then you were not really able to back that up with anything other than growth in religion is tied to science.
I'll give you the last word here, 'cause I have no science background to speak of, and as a result communication between us would be pointless.
First, what do you consider the narrative of Christianity. That Eve ate an apple as you provided in your example? We don't even know if it was an apple but you are forming it as a fact. Isn't the narrative of Christianity salvation? Does it matter whether the story of Adam and Eve is literally true or just man's way of describing the origin of man and the glory of God. It makes no difference. Does it matter whether there are 'four corners' to the world as stated in the bible or whether that is just the common language of man in that time. It makes no difference to the Christian narrative of salvation. Does it make a difference on how God created man? Not really. Does evolution falsify the Bible? Not really.
I tried to explain. Just as heliocenticity did not destroy the message of Christianity, Evolution will not destroy th message of Christianity. Religion is always in transition. The threats to a congregation usually do not come from the outside but from the inside; not from science but from the struggle over domination of the congregations. Those religions that are able to grow with science will survive. Those that cannot, will not survive, at least survive as a significant religion. We still have those flat-earthers and geocentrists but they are relegated to the looney bin by most.
I think you got that line from one of your creationist websites, not from me.