Well, now, I'm intrigued by your comment in the article, Josh, that it was almost a historical accident that evolution and modernism became bundled together and fundamentalism with anti-evolution.

Can you unpack that further?

Yeah, so the reason why, and it makes sense when you look at the history of how it happened,

but it didn't have to happen that way.

And I think the key individuals I point to is B.B. Warfield and also James Orr.

So B.B. Warfield is at Princeton.

He's the one arguing against Briggs.

He's kind of the father of fundamentalism.

And he writes about evolution, and he's open to it.

He's tentatively open.

And, of course, they didn't have the evidence behind it that we have today.

He has really no problem at all

with God using evolution to create over long periods of time to create animal and plant life.

The one place where he has reservations, it's like a pause, is when it comes to human evolution,

and particularly the narratives about Adam and Eve. He doesn't know how to make sense of that, but he thinks there's got to be some way,

and he wants to see that resolve first, but he's open to it.

Then the other person is James Orr.

James Orr is a famous Scottish theologian who wrote, I think, more of the fundamentalist essays than anyone else.

And so there's the fundamentals.

They started out as pamphlets.

There's around, I think, around 80 of these essays that are published eventually in 1915

by Biola University.

...