Just one last correction. Hebrew Scripture is a moral not literal history. The emphasis is on what is the lesson for how we should live not the objective chronicling of events (which is how "history" is defined today). I can share yet another example of this in Scripture in the events described in Judges (Chapter 11) concerning Jephthah and his daughter. Jephthah of Gilead told G-d if He gives him victory in battle, he would sacrifice the first thing he sees upon his return. The first thing he sees is his beloved daughter, and she is sacrificed to great lament. Now, Jewish Law is quite explicit that human sacrifice is expressly forbidden by G-d, and an "abomination" (e.g. Vayikrah [Lev.] 18:21). No one therefore mistook the parable as "history" nor "legend" of true events. It is a moral cautionary tale. First, Jews are not to treat with G-d like the idolators, making personal deals in return for one's worship. Second, breaking a vow (one's given word) has serious consequences and thus one should never make rash vows.
The same mistake should not be applied to the literal interpretation of the story of Exodus, nor to assuming one knows better than G-d.
Thus Scripture's relevance is greater to a Jew than mere "legend."
1) The tale is legend, not literal history. Okay, I can definitely go there. But, that only has me pull back one step, because I think that if the idea is to learn lessons, you have to be aware of... more