In this forum the debate Evolution vs Creationism is reduced to Science vs Religion, which are two different perspectives on life, with different ways of explaining life.
Science deals with the material (physical reality of body in the environment); and religion deals with the immaterial aspect (life as a lived experience - relationships, consciousness, morality). A preference for one perspective does not negate the other.
In psychology there are different perspectives to examine behaviour. These perspectives have different goals and priorities in research, different methodologies and domains of analysis, as well as different concepts of 'self'. For example, the psychodynamic perspective (popularly known as 'Freudian') places emphasis on childhood experiences and relationships. It relies on talk therapies and experiential rather than experimental evidence. A biological perspective focuses on chemical components in the brain, hormonal levels, genome sequencing and brain wave abnormalities. It relies on experimental evidence. A social dynamic perspective looks at how a person is positioned in society - their gender, socio-economic position, culture and historical period. It relies on experiential and experimental evidence.
Each perspective offers a different way of looking at the behaviour of patients. For example, let's take an attempted suicide. A psychodynamic therapist would examine the patient's relationship with his parents, siblings and would look carefully at his childhood by questioning and talking to the patient. A biological therapist might never meet the patient, preferring to look at brain scans, blood tests and other medical procedures. A social constructivist would look at his social background, work, if he is on welfare benefits, his marriage, etc. The attempted suicide might be due to one or a combination of any of the above factors. Our understanding of the patient is only enhanced by using the different perspectives.
Psychological perspectives are sometimes irreconcilable because of their different assumptions and methodologies. But to say that a preference for one negates another is absurd and irresponsible in the care of patients.
The same goes for the study of life, including its evolution. Religious scripture is more than 2000 years old - long before the arrival of modern science. Explanations of creation are full of symbolism and metaphor that we do not yet understand. Scripture is not a science paper, but a fascinating document of human culture. For as soon as man could write, he wrote how he came to be. Where did he get these stories, we do not know. Hieroglyphics are a fascinating collection of early writing, but until the discovery of the Rosetta Stone we did not properly understand what was written. The same goes for scripture. It clearly denotes a progression of biology on Earth (evolution), it clearly states there were distinct periods of development (punctuated equilibrium) - this is fascinating. But the strength and purpose of religion is to help us deal with life as a 'lived experience' - the highs, lows, confusion, pain, love and sadness - which science has nothing to say about.
Science does help us understand the physical properties of life, both in the present and past. We would not have medicine, engineering, technology without it and surely our lives are better because of science. But the adherence to one perspective and the exclusion of the other only narrows our understanding of life and how we got here.
Evolution viewed through only a scientific perspective (current theory) sees life as the result of violent cosmic accident and will probably end by violent cosmic accident. How it happened, we will never know because no one was there to record it - a mystery of history. But we have faith that one day science will unlock the mystery.
Evolution viewed through a religious perspective (current understanding) is the result of God's work. How it happened, we don't know because no one was there to record it - mystery of God's work. But we have faith that one day God will uncover the mystery.
The two sides are not so different and by investigating both we can achieve a greater understanding of life and how we got here.