So all of the claims that the Bible is incompatible with scientific discoveries--including the theory of evolution or the Big Bang--are founded on modern interpretations of the Bible, and specifically on interpretations that don't involve much competence in reading it.
Actually, those interpretations appear to have been largely invented and promoted by atheists--people who wanted to make the theory of evolution a new means of attack against Christianity. They were incompetent at reading the Bible because they didn't care to try to understand it. And they were willing to pervert science for completely unscientific purposes, even though some of them were eminent scientists.
The problem from the Christian side is that some took the bait: they swallowed hook, line, and sinker the atheists' interpretation of scripture, and started defending it against science instead of exposing it as incompetent. So we have two extreme sides, both agreeing on the most foolish notion possible: an approach to the Bible that would get them a failing grade in a freshman lit course, if anyone still used the Bible as material for lit courses.
Meanwhile, most of us (and it IS most Christians, although in the intellectual backwater of the U.S. we're only a narrow majority) shake our heads in amazement and move one.
I see no good reason why the views given in this volume should shock the religious feelings of any one. It is satisfactory, as showing how transient such impressions are, to remember that the greatest discovery ever made by man, namely, the law of the attraction of gravity, was also attacked by Leibnitz, “as subversive of natural, and inferentially of revealed, religion.” A celebrated author and divine has written to me that “he has gradually learnt to see that it is just as noble a conception of the Deity to believe that He created a few original forms capable of self-development into other and needful forms, as to believe that He required a fresh act of creation to supply the voids caused by the action of His laws.”