"We're setting aside the question of whether religions are true in a metaphysical sense."
Which is another way of saying, "We are fools." And being fools, they then proceed to suggest that "Christianity itself may be a function of evolution", which is another way of saying it is false.
The one thing Christianity is most emphatically *not* a function of is evolution. That is because the Second Person of the Blessed Trinity is, you know, the Creator and not a creature.
Yes, there are relatively trivial things that can be said about how Christianity adapted to culture, about the way its adherents outbred their competitors in ancient pagan culture (and are still doing so). But the metaphysic that lies behind this bit of rubbish is more far-reaching than that. It aims to reduce The Revelation to a mere fact of nature, which it can never be, any more than Christ is merely a man.
It also, by the way, is founded on a good solid lie that makes me wonder if adherents of the Darwin mythos even bother to watch the news:
The theory of evolution holds that all creatures are driven by a biological urge to pass on as many of their own genes as possible to the next generation.
Religious believers are often accused of having compartmentalized brains that keep secular and religious ideas from contacting one another and cause cognitive dissonance. How anybody, in the age of Planned Parenthood, rage at Catholic anti-contraceptive teaching, population planning movements, child-free movements, demographic collapse all over Europe and so forth can seriously declare that humans are the helpless puppets of an innate urge to pass on as many of their own genes as possible to the next generation...
Well, let's just say that the Darwin mythos seems to require an initial outlay of faith capital that dwarfs the mustard seed Christ asks for.