How about not allowing fundamentalist define our thinking. How about looking a the Hebrew bible as metaphorical and symbolic. It was taken from ancient oral traditions. To the present day the literalist have exploited the scriptures for their murderous benefit. Even in the high middle ages creation was dated biblically with updates. With the first efforts to put a Bible together found inerrancy impossible due to contradictions-some 30,000 of them. That was the first time out.

In reality most Christians, in terms of raw numbers but not always in terms of political influence, embrace evolution either outright or via theistic evolution. It is the vocal nutters, the literalist / interrantist types who oppose evolution.

Don't underestimate the ability of believers to cherry pick the parts of the Bible they will emphasize or discount or outright ignore.

I have been an athiest before reading Archibald MacLeish' play JB. A criticism of gods behavior in the book of job. JB confirmed for me in 9th grade it was convaluted.
Luckily my grandparents , specifically my grand mother, didnt discourage me from questioning the logic that someone who never heard of Jesus didnt get to go.to heaven. She just said, "It does have some holes in the story, doesnt it." Yet they sent me to a german lutheran school my mother and grandmother had gone to for the 3 years I lived with them.
That book creates god worse than most men, but more like a narcissistic ass.

The belief in Genesis as a literary concept is not what the early church fathers considered. Augustine certainly consider most of the bible to be allegory which is the great irony. These guys were the fundamentalist thinkers that began the systematic approach to Christianity.

Bearing in mind the original meaning of the term fundamental, i.e. forming a necessary base or core; of central importance, the evangelistic types who who refer to themselves as fundamentalists are not only ill-informed of their religion's basis but way off beam with their doctrine.