Thomas Aquinas wrote about how there are different kinds of knowledge, and that it was appropriate to use what was then the new learning (a revival of Aristotlian system of logic, deductive reasoning, and syllogisms) to understand the physical world.
OTOH, I'll quibble a bit -- there are some people with dots and letters after their names who are indeed on some kind of atheist crusade; that doesn't mean all scientists, all historians, all secular scholars, are part of that crusade. Certain groups arose for example in Britain who were trying to undermine the Old Testament in particular in order to undermine the divine right of kings; I don't support the divine right of kings, but I'm also not under the banner of long-dead blanket bashers, either.
An example is, Ramses II "the Great" (he was great at self-promotion, and lived a long time, I'll give him that much) was very definitely much later than Moses and the Exodus, yet supposed literalists saddle on the wrong ID of Ramses as the pharaoh of the Exodus, without having the comprehension to understand that it can't possibly be, and that the equation was dreamed up by people with insufficient information and promoted ever since by people with agendas.
I have been following your perspective, and I am all in for what you have shared here. But for myself there are variables no one considers or will even be objective enough to consider and discuss in possibilities.
Example is simple arithmetic to start with. Either the arithmetic in the 1500s was very very different and flawed compared to modern arithmetic, or Ussher was really really bad at it. It does not compute as accurate even on it’s face or in the scripture it’s self. But to even question it is heresy and blasphemy.
Now here is a variable not considered in either camp... What if a true scientific physical change has happened along the way, maybe even several times when being applied to the length of a “day” for the earth and creator?
What if one day for God in Genesis was actually a billion years. And later the length of a year was confused because of mis-translation with months or days in the lives of the characters in the Bible who lived so long? Here is where science could support the possibility of an all mighty creator and the Bible it’s self. And at the same time give credit to the scientific discoveries.
But can we drop the firewall long enough to support these possibilities on an individual case by case that might support our own arguments? No, it would be heresy and blasphemy to even consider this. So we digress back into the superstitious all or none dark ages in faith rather than be objective and consider possibilities based on newer science.
We have locked ourselves into the ignorant dark ages rather than even consider any or all new discoveries at all. Christians are stepping on their own feet with this one.
I say that as both a historian and clergy...