An easier way to look at the "which parts are allegorical and which parts are factual" question, from the perspective of Christians, is to understand that there are essentially two kinds of Christians. We like to think of them as "literalists" versus "some parts are metaphorical"-ists, but it breaks down better if you think of the literalists as being those who say, "Ever word of the Word is God-breathed" (that's how they say it, verbatim), meaning they think of God as a boss who gave dictation, word for word, to His secretaries to write down for us.
The other group of Christians understand that most of the Bible is best described as man's attempt to understand God through humans who were holy men but still as fallible as the rest of us. They only take the words of Jesus as infallible, and the rest they are willing to filter through the flawed humanity who tried to describe God through their culture-influenced feelings on the subject. They don't think God ever literally wanted animal sacrifice, for instance, only that this is how the ancient Hebrews interpreted their place in the world (as in the story I posted earlier) and tried to make up for the "fall of man" from his primordial state in which man was in compliance with the natural world's laws, as created by God. So while they do cherry-pick which parts to follow and which parts to write off as human flaws and allegory, they don't see that as an inherent conflict but as an application of human reason to their belief in Jesus Christ as the only infallible thing that ever existed. Only the literalists think the Bible must be 100% or 0%.
The other group of Christians understand that most of the Bible is best described as man's attempt to understand God through humans who were holy men but still as fallible as the rest of us. They only take the words of Jesus as infallible, and the rest they are willing to filter through the flawed humanity who tried to describe God through their culture-influenced feelings on the subject. They don't think God ever literally wanted animal sacrifice, for instance, only that this is how the ancient Hebrews interpreted their place in the world (as in the story I posted earlier) and tried to make up for the "fall of man" from his primordial state in which man was in compliance with the natural world's laws, as created by God. So while they do cherry-pick which parts to follow and which parts to write off as human flaws and allegory, they don't see that as an inherent conflict but as an application of human reason to their belief in Jesus Christ as the only infallible thing that ever existed. Only the literalists think the Bible must be 100% or 0%.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
