How do Theistic Evolutionists who are Christians reconcile these Scriptures with the adoption of evolutionary theory?

A Christians view on the account of creation can vary depending on how literal one interprets scripture, or groups of Christians for that matter.

An extremely literal view of creation is that God created the universe and everything in it in seven 24 hour days. That would be to deny the process of evolution outright.

The majority of Christians do not take the Bible that literally, not because they want to try and make Gods Word to fit in with scientific discovery, but because the Bible is clearly a work that uses symbolism and speaks metaphorically about things. Much like how Jesus used parables.

The author's of the Bible interpreted their inspiration with an understanding that humans had thousands of years ago. It wasn't written with an understanding and explanation that people would have in the 21st century.

Hence the reason that Christians in general can understand that God can, and obviously did use evolution processes when creating all things.

There was no death amongst the Children of God (man), but this does not mean there was no death amongst the other creatures of the Earth.

I'm a devout Christian who somewhat minored in Human Evolution and Physical Anthropology in University. The scriptures are for our spiritual well being only, and were never meant to serve as as a textbook for how the world was created; the physical means by which God organized the universe and all the life in it.

Theistic evolutionists such as myself accept that science does not disprove God or his works, and that the scriptures do not disprove scientific fact. Instead, a correlation must be found between the two. In this instance, it has to be true that there was no death before the fall, and that there were millions of years prior to the fall were there were innumerable species evolving and dying.

Adam was the first man. His mortal body was created for his eternal spirit to dwell in on Earth. Adam was not however, the first hominid on the planet. There is irrefutable evidence that other intelligent human-like creatures lived on earth long before the fall of man (Homo heidelbergensis, Homo neanderthalensis, paleolithic Homo sapiens, etc.). This gives us reason to believe that man did not evolve from other creatures on Earth, man was created and put here as described in the scriptures, but there were other creatures who existed here prior that were significantly similar to man. For what purpose, we can only speculate, perhaps the world needed to be properly prepared before the Children of God could dwell here, and pre-adamic hominids were the test creatures.

The best way to reconcile the scriptures with scientific fact with this matter is to accept that there was a creation event, where the children of God were placed on Earth in human bodies, and that they alone were without death until the first sin. The world was not created for the other creatures of the Earth, they were put here for our use. The world was created for man, and the scriptures only apply to man. Therefore, when the scriptures say:

21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.

22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive. (1 Corinthians 15:22)

it means that by man came the death of men, not universal death of all living things.

The NT writers reasoned from the Genesis account as it is scripture. They did this because what God has revealed in scripture is 'profitable for teaching, reproof, and correction' (2 Timothy 3:16). However in both the NT and OT we also see reasoning about the nature of God from what is observed in nature; Romans 1:20, Psalms 8:3, Jeremiah 10:12-13 and so on.

Broadly speaking, then, the Biblical writers leaned on two sources of information about the universe. The first source is what God has directly revealed about the universe through prophecy. The second is from each individual's observations of the natural world, from which God's 'invisible attributes' can be 'clearly perceived' (Romans 1:20).

So scripture tells us two things; God's attributes are 'clearly perceived' in nature, and scripture is profitable for 'teaching'. Therefore it must necessarily be the case that anything we observe in the natural world is going to tell us about the nature of reality (specifically God's 'attributes'), as is scripture.

What does this mean for Paul's teaching that sin preceded death? It means that from a scriptural standpoint Paul was correct, but from observing the natural world (in light of the evidence for evolution through natural selection), he was wrong. So scripture contradicts our observations of the natural world in this case.

Does this mean that scripture is false, unreliable, or a lie? No, because it is a source of truth independent to our observations of nature, that is being 'God breathed'.

Consider Numbers 12:8. It says that it is possible for God to speak in 'riddles' sometimes and 'clearly' other times. The 'riddles' are no less inspired than the 'clear' explanation. Another striking example is Matthew 13:14-16. Jesus says that parables are taught to those whose 'hearts have grown dull'. But he says to those who are physically witnessing and experiencing him 'blessed are your eyes, for they see, and your ears, for they hear.' So what I think Jesus is saying is the absolute truth is revealed to those who see and hear him, because he is completely tangible and personal. Everything must be interpreted in light of his presence.

To be as terse as possible; God has revealed himself through scripture and the natural world, so Paul's reasoning from scripture is completely valid. Evolution is another part of God's revelation. The fact that this truth about the natural world contradicts scripture is of no consequence to the truth of the faith. I say this because scripture tells us that anything God reveals about himself in the natural world must be true alongside scripture itself. Only in Jesus will we 'see and hear' clearly.