It is obvious that the main goal of any religious text is to teach metaphorical lessons where facts are but window dressing for the meanings to be conveyed. Let us say that the bible for arguements sake was complete hisotrical fiction. It would in no way invalidate the many time tested values and lessons it teaches that still hold true today. To discuss any work of such value in a purely factual framework and use that to vlaidate or invalidate the lessons meant to be conveyed
is simply ignoring the entire point of why the text emerged in the first place.
Note: I use "secondary" with respect to the way language works. What I am calling a secondary meaning could still be what the author(s) intended as their primary meaning.
Yes...language and it's use conveys the meaning. However, one must note that regardless of a general intended meaning the interpretations
reflect what the individual relates to and searches for. Despite this people as a whole share many of the same basic valuable life shaping interpretations. This often crosses religious borders and seems to reflect basic values we gravitate to as a whole of humanity.
There are many "genesis" stories. In all that I have heard the facts are window dressing to the meanings meant to be conveyed. The meaning moral/life shaping lessons are the purpose and surely how they were meant to be viewed and discussed. This is the primary function. To make us think about the meaning of life if you will.