How can one reconcile evolution and fall of man? Christians, muslims, jews, deists, atheists?

Obviously, the evidences for Evolution is obtained through an / a philosophical & Ideological bias, One just has to see the answers posted here by Atheist to see that with their lying Evolution Web sites and pseudo-Science they employ.

What is tragic is that many Christians (and I use that word Christian loosely) are succumbing to worldly pressure to adjust their theology to “Make it Fit”

For it is Written “ 2 Timothy 4:3-4 (NKJV) For the time will come when they will not endure sound doctrine, but according to their own desires, [because] they have itching ears, they will heap up for themselves teachers; and they will turn [their] ears away from the truth, and be turned aside to fables.

These Christians do not know just HOW That effects Their theology

How a Christian views Creation has a profound effect on that.

How do beliefs about creation impact the rest of theology?

http://www.gotquestions.org/creation-theology-beli...

Why is Biblical Creationism so important?

http://www.gotquestions.org/biblical-creationism.h...

The Gospel—Evidence for Creation

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v11/n1...

Many secular and atheist groups mock Creation Science and Christians for not being scientific. However, some of the most influential scientists past and present have been and are creationists

Some modern scientists who have accepted the biblical account of creation

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/bios/

A Good read that explains the Bias against Creation is here

The Battle for the Beginning

By: John MacArthur

http://www.christianbook.com/the-battle-for-the-be...

The Case For The Creator

The Case for the Creator is a deep look into the evidence for Intelligent design. "My road to atheism was paved by science... but, ironically, so was my later journey to God." -Lee Strobel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRJ_po3_JQg

http://www.answersingenesis.org/

http://www.icr.org/

In short, it's just not an issue in Judaism. There is no 'fall of man' or concept of 'original sin'. Christianity got both of those from thoroughly non-Jewish sources. divorah's given you an excellent answer from a Jewish POV, so I'll focus on the other issue.

Christianity's concept of 'original sin' has its roots in Greek Stoic philosophy which saw the physical world as inherently corrupt and the body as a prison for a pure soul or mind. Other salvation religions took that view of things and ran with it, particularly the Orphic Mysteries. I can write more about the details of that if you like. But basically it was part of the philosophical world view underlying these religions. It doesn't seem to have been questioned within salvation religions.

How that world view played out varied in the different salvation religions. In general, the consequences tended to become extreme in later stages of development. The first salvation religion, the Egyptian Osirian Mysteries, didn't have that underlying Stoic world view and salvation was simply from death. Romans appropriated that, added the philosophy, etc. By the time Christianity came on the scene, the after death scenarios had gotten pretty dire. That's the historical context the 'fall of man' and 'original sin' developed in.

The Roman approach to religion was heavily syncretic. They freely appropriated elements from every culture they came into contact with and adapted them to suit themselves. Whether that accurately reflected the originating culture wasn't a concern. They did this so frequently that it would have been strange if no one had tried a version which drew on Judaism's ancient sacred literature.

Put all of this together and we have non-Jews appropriating Jewish texts and sledgehammering their own theologies and world views in. Jews haven't done that so there's no need in Judaism to reconcile those problems.

Our version of creationism is essentially the Big Bang theory from the Nasadiya Sukta hymn (RV:10:129) in the Rig Veda which says that the universe came from a point through the power of heat.

And yes the majority of Hindu denominations (apart from the Hare Krishnas) would accept Darwinian evolution as the best explanation of how humans came about.

The British geneticist J.B.S Haldane essentially said that the 10 avatars of Vishnu are a good depiction of the way life has evolved.

Although Christians got the story of creation from us Jews, the way they interpret the story bears no resemblance to the Jewish interpretation.

1. There is no "fall of man" in Judaism nor is there "original sin". Both of these concepts are purely the invention of Christianity.

2. In Judaism, we read the story of creation as WHAT HaShem did, NOT HOW He did it. The story of creation, when read from the Jewish perspective, does not conflict with the theory of evolution. This is because the story of creation doesn't take place in seven 24 hours periods, rather, the word as "days" in the story of creation actually refers to an undefined period of time similar to an epoch.

Basically physicality vs consciousness. Contemplate that and see if it makes sense for you.

The Fall of Man is in Kabblah (Jewish mysticism). Jews have a slightly different version of original sin. In Christianity original sin is a selfish nature. In Judaism it's called "bread of shame" when you get things with out effort they have no value.

Personally, any answer they give will be twisted to fit the mold of science while finding a happy medium to uphold their beliefs.

One way or another, Genesis fill fall on it's *** and the theist will make up a misinterpreted faith answer to bypass the question and you'll be back at square one.

call the story a parable

even before we knew about evolution imho only fools interpreted it literally.

I reject evolution that how I do it