The Bible is wisdom literature. It's just supposed to make you stop and think. It's a collection of talking points intended to train you into becoming a better person. This might as well be a statement intended to provoke the reader to think about sacrifice and sinning. Rather than writing us on the nose. it's also specifically written for one congregation having a specific theological issue. There might be context missing.
That said Paul is a pretty clear thinker and writer. But that doesn't mean we can just take whatever it says literally. That's not the kind of book it is.
Just because there's now a Christian literalist/fundamentalist tradition, and the early church spent a lot of time hammering out doctrinal unity, doesn't mean that's what the writer intended when he wrote it.
Paul had no idea his letters would be included into the primary Christian fetish they worshipped. In his mind he was writing talking points to interpreting the Torah. I think it's a bit silly to read this in any other way.
The bible is not 'one or the other' in regards to "it's either allegory V Literal." We know this by the obvious.... for example: we can plainly understand the Ten Commandments, and other laws etc. are meant to be literal! And there are the analogies, allegories, parables, practical wisdom, history (politcal & geographic), poetry songs and emotions. And as you highlight wisdom...
I suppose you could also say, that wisdom from the bible, is the sum of all of those aspects combined. What a way to tell a story!
You're making the common Christian reinterpretation of the past to fit current ideological needs of the Christian church. No, matter how much you want it not to be, we know very well how to read wisdom litterature.
Since the written word varied so much between books the ancients had a much less rigid view of anything theological. We read texts differently before and after the printing press was invented.
I think the ancients understood the difference between genuine wisdom and political propaganda. Both the New and the old testament is full of both.
BTW, the ten commandments are just obvious stuff. Nobody needs to be told any of that. The first three commandment is the only interesting ones. I think the other commandments are there to sell the first three. And these three are 100% political. It makes no difference to the faithful if they worship one or twenty gods. The top three commandments are the result of the king (I forget which) wanted to raise money by insisting that all Jews only sacrifice animals to Jehova in the temple of Jerusalem AND they only sacrificed animals bought from the king. It was a tax essentialy. Inadvertently he invented Abrahamic monotheism.
The first ten are just the first ten commandments. There is 613. The ancient Jews thought they were all as important.
Jesus (and Paul) thought this was silly and thought some of them were anachronistic and could be stricken. He then inadvertently created a new religion. Which changed the original meaning of the first three commandments.
I'm sure the ancient Jews often rolled their eyes at the first three commandments and thought "sure, the only god told you that we now have to do all our worship in the one temple under your control which exclusively benefits you and your family" when they made burned offerings at the temple.
Archeologists have found small private shrines to Baal, Dagon, Anat, Moloch, etc active well into Post Christian Times. Jews understood full well how much the king of the Jews could be greedy and full of shit. Archeology backs it up.
Christianity is a more streamlined and simpler religion than Paganism. Which makes it easier, but it also leads to intellectual laziness. Christian theology is more shallow than pagan theology is. For this reason I think the ancient Jews were more cynical about the Old Testament than what modern Christians are, who often seem to swallow it uncritically.
We have a very good understanding of how the ancients used wisdom litterature.
Christianity is interesting in that it stresses the need of accepting and NOT think. Ie faith. But that wouldn't have made sense to those writing and reading the Bible in those early days. They were all pagans and would be thinking and reading like pagans. Ie the people the Bible was written for and who they tried to convince. Only a modern Christian would have the ability to chose to interpret the Bible as you do.
You forgot who did what, because it seems you were more concerned about asserting some things to my conduct. 
