Not exactly true. They’re not contrary to the scriptural interpretation that arose after we became aware of the scientific facts. But you really have to weasel the words to make them come out that way.
That would make some sense if it were God communicating to the ancient people in terms they understood, i.e. flat earth etc. Your main escape would be to say that it wasn’t intended to communicate the shape of the earth, that the shape was peripheral to the main message, and he didn’t want to distract from that message in order to teach them science. That wouldn’t be an error, but it would be saying things that aren’t true; that position would be that the bible is wrong on purpose about what God considers unimportant details of the story.
But it isn’t our frame of reference, is it? It’s the frame of reference of the people who wrote the bible, or were inspired to write it. We, however, know better.