If the world thought geocentric theory were true, you would be finding things in the Bible to support your views. Again, welcome to religion.
So what scientific theory can I use to support the world is 7000+- years old? What theory can I use to support a global flood? These are things the Bible state about the world, and it's either true or not true. That particular argument concerning changing the Bible or finding verses to fit what we think about the world, falls short when it comes to what the Bible says about our history. So I must show scientifically, the Bible is right. I have no problem in saying, for the longest, the church has been corrupt. They even lost the true reason why Jesus came, and teach we still have to do something to be accepted by God. (That we can please God in our own strength by following their set of rules) Just for future reference, my opinion about the church after Constatine made Christianity the official religion of Rome, is not good. (Not saying there weren't true Christians during the ages after this period, I'm a result of their prayers. Yet a lot of people were made Christians by corrupt men, God never wanted this to be forced on anyone. As a result, men's traditions were added on to what Jesus taught. I could go on and on about this stuff, but I don't want to bore you on that)
When it comes to science, it is very limited. Things that were once observable, are no longer. Pretty much 70% of the universe today is not observable, and 20% is barely observable through gravitational lensing. (Talking dark matter) The quantum world seems to run on very different rules than the macro universe, so you need a new theory to unify them. These are some major, major holes in our observation, yet we think we can come to a conclusion on where we come from based on it? We pride ourselves way too much if that is the case. What I'm getting at here is the only way we will know where we came from, is if we had an account from someone who's seen everything from the very beginning. Then we prove that account by thoroughly studying it's content, and testing it out. That's what I'm doing with the Bible. I'm testing out what the account says. (Whereas scientists only test out there observations, and by it, ruled out what the Bible has said, and of course all religious texts as well for that matter. However, when you truly consider the holes in our observation, it's no wonder there's a difference between what the Bible says and what our observations tell us)
What I'm doing with my studies, is providing a true scientific theory of the creation story, to be tested and repeated. As of right now, there is none, and the picture we get about Genesis is a bedtime story, easily ruled out by science. So that is one of my goals.