Well let's start at the beginning. I believe the following is literal. How do you interpret it?
Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Fine. I can agree with that. However, how do you define the beginning? If the "beginning" included all the processes science says led to the creation of the heavens and the earth, such as the big bang, the stellar development, and the planetary accretion that formed the earth, then I agree. Using modern science, it's even possible to make the case that six literal days is not inconsistent with these processes. It just requires the realization that time measurement is dependent on the reference frame. The reference frame of the universe immediately after the big bang would have been one in which a large gravitational field is present. Such large gravitational fields result in large time dilations, meaning that six days measured in that frame of reference could appear to be billions of years from our low-gravity reference frame. My question is this, if God is powerful enough to have created everything instantly just by speaking, why did it take Him six days? Why not just create everything instantly? The fact that God created everything over some time period, indicates that the processes described by modern science are not incompatible with the Scriptures.
So how does that verse disagree with sciences understanding of the solar system accreting from interstellar dust and gas?
If it rains, you would say that "God brought the rain". You would be right.
But I might choose to say that moisture condensed out of the air in the low pressure system, and I would be right as well.
The Bible does not disagree with science. Only your interpretation of it does.
If by "heaven" one means universe, no problem.
I continuing issue I have is that God was not writing a textbook, nor was He addressing a scientific convention, yet many expect His words to be interpreted as if He were.