Be careful with your words. The word "evolution" doesn't necessarily apply to "Darwin's Biological Theory of Evolution". Evolution is simply a word that means development or progression. When one says "Biological Evolution" then it simply refers to or, at least, should refer to the development of life. If we are to be accurate, a person's life from prenatal development to adult maturation is biological evolution. But generally, "biological evolution" refers to evolution at the population level rather than an individual level.

A big philosophical questions we posit about life is "How did we get here?". This can be further divided into two things "How did life begin?" and "Where did life go from there?". Evolution is the latter and bio-genesis is the former. Creationism and Intelligent Design attempt to answer the "How did we get here?" without first reducing it into two questions. This is something very important which you should understand. Although Darwin's book was entitled "On The Origin of Species", it deals with where life went once it was already here. Darwin's theory is formally called "orthogenesis". Many new theories are based on this idea i.e. that life has an innate tendency to move in an unilinear fashion due to some internal or external "driving force". This theory is considered no longer to be credible. The credibility now lies in the hands of Neodarwinism, which is actually a collection of several ideas. Neolarmarckism is similar.

"How did life begin?" ideas:

"Where did life go from there?" ideas:
And guess what? None of these are science. Yep, that's right. None of them. They're only making models in accordance to evidence found or finding evidence in accordance to their model. But here's the one key factor: they're all unfalsifiable. You can not test any of these "theories" because each of them is a model of existence in the past. Science deals with proofs, not evidence. It's not science, it's historical speculation. So if you're going to believe in any of these, then do so on the basis of the historical method rather than the scientific method. The only thing you can be scientifically sure of is the collected data (provided the data isn't manipulated by some interest group). You be the judge.