You are conflating, and you are using figurative in a way that the people you are criticizing aren’t using it. You are using “figurative” to mean “didn’t happen.” No EC ever argues that God did not create the world, and creation is itself “figurative.” The rest of us are talking about interpretation. Words that describe things can be taken literally or taken figuratively. Whether you take the words literally or figuratively affects what you understand the intended meaning to be. It doesn’t say anything about whether the thing being described is true or false, fact or fiction.
If you interpret me saying, “I’m starving” literally, you think my intended meaning is that I am dying of malnutrition. If you interpret “I’m starving” figuratively, you think my intended meaning is that I am hungry and looking forward to eating. The actual facts of the situation and whether or not I am truthfully communicating my state of health or my state of hunger do not depend on which interpretation you choose. I could intend you to take my claim literally and be lying about dying. I could intend you to take my claim figuratively and be telling the truth about being hungry. There is no linguistic rule that lets you know, based solely on how I expressed myself, whether what I am saying is true or not. There are pragmatic rules and knowledge of a shared context that should point you to thinking my intended meaning was the figurative one.
It is the same with Genesis. People choose a figurative interpretation of the description because of pragmatic and contextual clues that the meaning was not intended to be taken literally. But that does not tell you anything about whether or not the description is true.
That’s the equivalent of you saying that when I say I’m starving, I’m not describing reality unless I am literally starving. No, if my intended meaning is that I’m hungry, and I am hungry, then I am indeed describing reality, you just did not interpret my intended meaning correctly.
Again, this is conflating figurative with not factual, which is wrong. “The gremlin did it” could very well have figurative meaning in some shared context and mean “yeah, we messed up the room.” In which case, my children would only be lying if they intended a literal meaning about a literal gremlin. Pragmatically, since we both know gremlins don’t exist, I would assume they did not intend a literal meaning, in which case, the whole gremlin thing would not be an excuse but a cute little joke, and I would tell them to clean up the room. God understands how human communication works, so why should we not expect him to expect us to make pragmatic inferences?
As I’ve already explained, since you keep using figurative to mean “not true/historical/factual” instead of what figurative really means, which is language that requires pragmatic inferences to interpret the intended meaning, I can’t do this. The way I determine whether language is intended as figurative or literal is by looking at the shared context and guessing what the speaker most likely intended to communicate.