Let’s begin. It all starts with well, what people of different faith traditions, including Christians have been doing for millenia. Let’s go more recent and then go back further starting with John Calvin who rejected heliocentrism as a position inspired by the devil and its adherents as possessed by the same:
We will see some who are so deranged, not only in religion but who in all things reveal their monstrous nature, that they will say that the sun does not move, and that it is the earth which shifts and turns. When we see such minds we must indeed confess the devil posses them, and that God sets them before us as mirrors, in order to keep us in his fear.** So it is with all who argue out of pure malice, and who happily make a show of their imprudence. When they are told: “That is hot,” they reply: “No, it is plainly cold.” When they are shown an object that is black, they will say it is white, or vice versa. Just like the man who said that snow is black; for although it is perceived and known by all to be white, yet he clearly wished to contradict the fact. And so it is that there are madmen who try to change the natural order, and even to dazzle men’s eyes and benumb their senses”-John Calvin, “Sermon on 1 Corinthians 10:19-24”, Calvini Opera Selecta, Corpus Refomatorum,Vol 49, 677, trans. by Robert White in “Calvin and Copernicus: the Problem Reconsidered”, Calvin Theological Journal 15 (1980), p233-243, at 236-237
Or perhaps Alexander Ross in England in the mid 1600s, described as ‘the vigilant watchdog of conservatism and orthodoxy’ who once likened Copernicanism to other heresies and their threat to the truth of the Scriptures:
It is but a conceit of yours to say, that the Scripture accommodates itself to the vulgar conceits, in saying, the Sun riseth and falleth. I warrant you, if the vulgar should conceive that the heavens were made of water, as the Gnostics held; or that the Sun and Moon were two ships, with the Manichees, or that the world was made of the sweat of the Aeons, with the Valentinians; or whatever absurd opinions they should hold, you make the Scripture say so, and to accommodate itself to their conceits. as recorded in Dellenberger, Protestant Thought and Natural Science
Also John Edwards in the later part of the 1600s in England who wrote as the Archbishop of Canterbury who wrote A Demonstration of the Existence and Providence of God From the Contemplation of the Visible Structure of the Greater and Lesser World spending a decent amount of ink outlining why Copernicanism was not Scriptural.
Let’s go back about a thousand years before this. Here is Lacantius writing, using the Bible and his interpretation thereof to reject evidence of geocentrism:
“How is it with those who imagine that there are antipodes opposite to our footsteps? Do they say anything to the purpose? Or is there any one so senseless as to believe that there are men whose footsteps are higher than their heads? or that the things which with us are in a recumbent position, with them hang in an inverted direction? that the crops and trees grow downwards? that the rains, and snow, and hail fall upwards to the earth?” (Lactantius. The Divine Institutes 3.24)
Augustine was a little more hesitant, but in the City of God he had a nice section on antipodes. He partially rejects that people could be living on the other side of the Earth for Scriptural reasons. Ultimately he has some good arguments and they are popular for centuries to come on this topic.
How about St. John Chrysostom where the Earth floats on some waters? He obviously was inspired by Genesis and other Scriptures and was, well completely wrong.
“When therefore thou beholdest not a small pebble, but the whole earth borne upon the waters, and not submerged, admire the power of Him who wrought these marvellous things in a supernatural manner! And whence does this appear, that the earth is borne upon the waters? The prophet declares this when he says, 'He hath founded it upon the seas, and prepared it upon the floods.'1416 And again: 'To him who hath founded the earth upon the waters.'1417 What sayest thou? The water is not able to support a small pebble on its surface, and yet bears up the earth, great as it is; and mountains, and hills, and cities, and plants, and men, and brutes; and it is not submerged!”–St. John Chrysostom, Homilies Concerning the Statues, Homily IX, paras. 7–8, in A Select Library of the Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers of the Christian Church, Series I, Vol IX, ed. Philip Schaff, D.D., LL.D., American reprint of the Edinburgh edition (1978), W. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.,Grand Rapids, MI, pp. 403–04.
Here is a wacky website, i.e. from a Biblical flat-earther that documents how many patristics were inspired by the plain reading of the text (i.e. the earth was flat and in the center of the solar system).
Besides a few scattered times in history where maybe some parts of the Bible appear to accurately describe the world in a modern science sense, there are just as many, if not more parts that are well just plain wrong. Now I wouldn’t call them ‘wrong,’ but just simply the best physical description they could have had at the time they lived in but the Scriptures certainly should not ever be a guide to doing scientific research. There is just no basis for such and any ‘concord’ that can exist, is only ever done after scientific things have been hashed out. Many times this is where people come along and preach about the Bible’s amazing scientific foresight which is really no foresight at all.
At the same time, there is little historical warrant to reject scientific evidence because of an interpretation of Scripture and mountains of evidence against doing such. So I conclude that it is dishonest to hold one’s interpretation of Scripture over the heads of any evidence demanding that it fit into some kind of predetermined packaging. I wouldn’t say that WLC has done this yet (though he very well may at some point after he finishes his Biblical research). I don’t think any such critique is absurd given the very long history of Christians rejecting scientific evidence because of their interpretation of the Bible.