In truth there is nothing one can say that is not a personal take on a particular issue.
That being said one can find some evidence to support one view over another, the starting point however must be whether one can honestly choose a metaphorical intent over a historical intent in the text.
In my case I don't deny that a metaphorical view is the easier approach. When confronted with the apparantly unexplainable, that is usually the easiest take. But, again can the text honestly support such a view?
The argument here is not whether the event actually happened but whether the text was written as history or merely as metaphor.