So the people who lived nearer the event by thousands of years believed to be literal but the "scholars" that lived thousands of years after the event they think its metaphorical. Why believe the "scholars"?
Good question, raymond frantz.
Jews have never believed this information was ever literal. These scholars are just pointing that out.
It's not the invention of modern scholars. As the The Jewish Study Bible illustrates, the information comes from the testimony of the ancients, not modern people, especially the ancient Jewish sages who also testify that these things are not literal
Ancient teachers like Rashi (Scholom Yitzchaki) and Maimonides, and other great contributors to the Talmud are some of the persons that modern scholars pay close attention to.
While there are modern contributions that are taken into consideration, they generally take second place these days, especially since the discovery of the Qumran Scrolls. Other ancient texts and any contribution they might have to the meaning and context to the Tanakh, especially in comparison to other Mesopotamian writings as a genre are always allowed to be read as a whole along with Jewish tradition, within Jewish culture, in the scope and evolution of Jewish history.
But one always begins with the testimony of the most ancient of sources--and when it comes to the Jewish texts that means with the Jewish sages. Their testimony is that these works are legends, folklore, and mythology. The Torah itself is a work of Law, not history. The Talmud itself is the greatest testimony to this.
For more information, Conservative Judaism has its own volume of the NJPS Torah, called Etz Hayim: Torah and Commentary. It has the same English translation of the NJPS that The English Study Bible has alongside the Hebrew Masoretic text, and similar information in far greater detail that I am explaining here.
In other words, the information is ancient.
