"If our literal interpretation of his outline description in Genesis does not fit the facts of His universe, that only means that we obviously have literally misinterpreted His Word. His Universe and His Word are both His -- to say that they are not in agreement is to call Him a liar. I, for one, dare not do that..."Neither do we. But instead of questioning His Word, YE Creationists question the so-called "facts" presented by evolutionists.
You are assuming that evolutionists "know" the facts of His universe and are correct both about their scientific observations and their interpretations of what those scientific observations mean. Therefore, you conclude that we have "misinterpreted" God's word.
YE Creationists do the opposite. We do look to see if we have misinterpreted, but frankly, we don't see it, therefore, we question the alleged "facts".
Thus you use "relativistic effects" to explain why when God says "days" he didn't mean "days" the way man has always understood them. There is nothing in scripture to indicate that's the frame of reference is God, but rather "morning and night" are used repeatedly to qualify the days of the creation week, which does imply rotation and a frame of reference of the earth. The creation week is used as justification for the Sabbath. Jesus referred to the Creation week. And all were done in ways that to the casual reader implies one earth week. But relativity is understood, so I'll grant you that If IF IF the reference frame is God instead of earth, despite the seemingly scriptural evidence to the contrary, then the Genesis days could be longer. I don't believe it, but I'll grant you that possibility.
But now we come to the order of Creation. How do you explain Whales before land animals? How do you explain plants before the insects required to pollinate them? How do you explain that God said He formed Adam from dust, and Eve from Adam's rib? This is no longer an interpretation issue. To accept evolution in it's current form, is to say Genesis doesn't mean what it says. To accept evolution is to say Genesis is not just a dumbed down version that doesn't explain everything, but rather it's factually wrong. I can see the God of Truth giving us a dumbed down version, after all He didn't want us to progress to quickly at the tower of Babel. But to give us a factually wrong version? No, I can't see that.
What's more God through the Apostle Peter, 2 Peter 3, gave a warning about adopting uniformitarian beliefs (that all things continue as they have from the beginning), and that that belief would result in man forgetting Creation and the Flood.
Actually Genesis says that God "formed man from the dust of the earth".
Behold the dust of the earth:
God created the "dust of the earth" (the elements) when He Created the Heavens and the Earth.
God FORMED -- not "created" -- (molded from what already existed ) [evolved] man's physical body to the point that it was capable of holding God's Spirit (the "breath of life").
It doesn't bother me one bit that the evidence indicates that the "forming" took a long time.
Eve? Sounds an awfully lot like cloning...
God is Spirit. It is man's Spirit -- not his physical body -- that is "in the image of God", Once you get that through your skull, you will be freed from your asinine insistence that God could not have used an evolutionary process to develop man's physical carcass to the point that it was ready to receive His Spirit.
(BTW, and FWIW, you make us Christians sound awfully ignorant when you confuse cosmology with biological evolution as you have done here... )