No, I don't think so. It's an 18th century idea - basically, people were trying to be rational and spiritual/religious simultaneously, and I think we're at a point where that's no longer necessary. If one is inclined to religion and tradition, one will likely choose that intellectual path. If one is inclined toward the physical and science, then that, which was still in its infancy in the 18th century, will be the choice of path. They're now pretty much mutually exclusive. At least I don't see a way of reconciling them in the present.
Being a Christian != being Ken Ham, people.
There are many doctors, engineers, and scientists who believe in God and are at least nominally Christian, like Francis Collins, for instance. You can choose both a religious path and a scientific one if one would like - I mean, the Vatican has an observatory and nearly every non-Baptist/fundamentalist religious university teaches at least some science.
Yes, I thought immediately of Francis Collins when it comes to prime mover beliefs in the modern era. Of course, he is really Deist plus literal Resurrection of Christ so that complicates things. You could argue that's where the Emergent Church ends up at, basically Easter Deism with the rest of the Bible being taken metaphorically.
