This reminds me very much of some of the points made in Bernard Ramm's The Christian View of Science and Scripture (1954).
Originally Posted by crawfish
Sad has been the history of the evil that good Christian men have done in regard to science. Bettex laments that far too often the Christian attitude toward science is an attitude unworthy of itself and "where not positively hostile, treats it with petty distrust, and an admixture of scorn, or at least with some aversion and distaste" (6). Dawson complains of "slipshod Christianity" which rests smugly in dogmatic theology, and has the most contemptible estimation of geology (7). John Pye Smith complained
[Evangelical castigators of science] are unwittingly serving the designs of [Christianity's] enemies [and are] secret traitors to the cause of Christianity (8)The judgment of White is proved a thousand times that the cheap weapons of religious opposition to science are like "Chinese gongs and dragon lanterns against rifled cannon" (9).
Does not the most hyperorthodox among us realize that most of the views he now holds about the Bible, medicine, science, and progress which he thinks are so orthodox, safe, sane, and Biblical, would, a few centuries ago, have cost him his life?
If evangelicalism continues to have a strong, outspoken group within it with such a negative approach to science, the prospects of instating the scientific respectability of Scripture are not good. If this pedantic hyperorthodoxy continues to be the representative voice in evangelical apologetics, the great cleavage between science and evangelicalism which occurred in the nineteenth century will not only be perpetuated through the twentieth, but it will be widened.