I wish that were true, but I don't think it is. Darwinism presents a world ruled by fang and claw (in which power, not right, prevail). My sympathies are with those who'd like to regard the world and nature itself as being guided by a benevolent God, and explained in an understandable way in the Bible. Alas, my own view is that there isn't a reasonable basis for religion either in Darwinism or in reliance on the inconsistent texts of the Bible.
I believe the only possible basis for religion lies in religious "experience" itself -- actual experience of something that transcends the natural (the natural -- examined closely -- is evil in many respects, by almost any standard accepted by decent human beings). By religious experience I mean something like what William James describes in The Varieties of Religious Experience, or what others claim to experience in mystical feelings of union with God or just in ordinary prayer.
Those experiences may be illusory, but in my opinion claims of religious experiences that transcend the natural world have a better chance of being true than far-fetched attempts to reconcile the claims of religion with what we see in the natural world.
I should add that I’m not saying that religious experience of the supernatural may not be reflected in the Bible, just that the Bible alone — without that experience — would not be convincing.
The natural world certainly is ruled by "fang and claw", as were our prehuman ancestors, until the moment described in Genesis where God breathed spirit into Adam and he became a fully living soul.
God's benevolence applied to nature simply means that despite many global disasters and mass extinctions, life clung stubbornly here, re-populated the earth and advanced, somehow, toward what we see today.
I believe God directed and directs every step of the way.