I think that you’re right about what evangelicalism demands. The problem is that it requires, as a starting point, a very narrow interpretation of both scripture and history. It says something important about foundations, and takes, as an assumption, that very narrow perspective. Many within the evangelical camp are drawn to the Calvinist perspective of apologetics that takes certain presuppositions as given, and works from there. There was a point where I considered that as a career option before I came face to face with the circular logic of it all. Progressive evangelicals have a way of disrupting the biblical and historical narratives told by Evangelicals (paying attention to the voices of women throughout Christendom, as an example), and end up paying the price for it. That price usually comes in the form of appeals to the Prodigal Son, etc., further adding to the In/Out, Yes/No.
I hope this makes sense.