The modern "anti-science" push in Christianity didn't really get firm ground until the 19th century - and developed primarily because prominent atheists of the era had a tendency to hold up every new "discovery" (most of which have since been proven to be bunk, like spontaneous generation and the luminous aether) as proof that all religion was false.
Incorrect, actually. The rest of your post is mighty fine, but this is not.
The Christianity vs Science was born in the 20th century. Specifically, in 1910. For pretty much all of Christianity's history, it was simply accepted by pretty much
everyone that the Bible was full of allegories and was not 100% the Truth and Infallible.
In 1910, the current scientific method was gaining ground. People were learning to demand solid evidence whenever someone made a dubious claim. The tales in the Bible were taken as that: tales written by ancient peoples that didn't know how the world work as well as people in the then-present (1910). It didn't mean that there weren't miracles and other things like that, but that quite a few of those might've been misunderstood natural phenomena or even made up because the writers wanted to make an event grander.
Some religiously conservative groups reacted to this by trying to return to the "roots" of their religion. The fundament, if you will. They started to engage in "Religious Archaeology" (most of the drivel on the "History" Channel is a good example). And also, in 1910 in the United States, a group of conservative protestant priests decided to convene. This also coincided with the
Scopes Monkey Trial.
In this meeting, these priests came up with the concept of an infallible Bible. They also came with a lot of "Christian traditions" that are now seen as something that's been around for ages. What are those "traditions"?
-Jesus being born from an actual virgin.
-Jesus sacrificing himself as divine justice instead of just being murdered by romans.
-Jesus ascending to the Heavens after his rebirth.
-Jesus will come back.
-Creationism
It should be noted that this group of priests was composed of some pretty different sects, including whites and blacks in a period where such were segregated pretty damn heavily. And once they pushed that out, the other types of Christianity (Catholics, Orthodox, Anglicans, etc) look at it and thought this was actually pretty damn cool and started copying them.
The whole concept of Intelligent Design appeared as an attempt to compromise this whole Religion vs Science conflict that was utterly fabricated in 1910.
EDIT: My source was a lecture I had the opportunity to attend last year by
Professor André Leonardo Chevitaresi