Replies

In your belief [that God changed His mind and was sorry, repentant and grieved that men "somehow" -- I suppose contrary to His wish, plan, ordination -- turned wicked on Him, and decided to drown them in Gen 6:6], when God sins like this, to whom does He confess?

That's not my belief, FK. That's my point. I think it is a story with a message. I don't for a moment believe that people turned wicked because (a) God didn't see it coming or (b) because He ordained it so. I don't believe God changes His mind, is grieved, sorry, or angry when we are wicked.

That whole section portrays God in human terms for early Hebrews to be able to relate to God, as most primitive people do.

It's not the physical event that it describes but the message that comes out of that story that matters: our wickedness (based on our choice to reject God) will bring (us) calamity. And it does! Without a fail.

In most of the OT, the people were scared into obedience and are scared into obedience to this day in some churches by being threatened with God.

That's unfortunate.

That whole section [on the flood] portrays God in human terms for early Hebrews to be able to relate to God, as most primitive people do. It's not the physical event that it describes but the message that comes out of that story that matters: our wickedness (based on our choice to reject God) will bring (us) calamity. And it does! Without a fail.

Yes, the message is true, but the fact that you discount the truth of the event proves that you, or your leaders, put the interpretation of man ahead of the text. There is absolutely nothing in that story that suggests it is an allegory. Nothing.

I assume that you take the accounts of the crucifixion and resurrection as a literal event, right? Those accounts also gave no indication of allegory. How are you to know when to believe and when not to? The only way to know is for your hierarchy to tell you so. Man's interpretation is always first, the Bible is always second.