A thrill is felt by anyone of the thousands (and more in past times) who routinely chant the Rks or sing the sAmans dedicated to Indra (with even a little understanding).
It almost feels liek a conspiracy was made to weaken the Aryans by villainizing Indra Dev in texts.
The last statement, though much fancied in some circles (eg. Nikhil’s vedism), is vastly overblown. Indra is not villainized - just a bit humanized (ie. adduced human-like flaws); like other Gods in some myths (including viShNu and shiva). People familiar with vedic lore would not think that Indra is not worthy of adoration (though they may think that no one is as worthy of adoration as their favorite deity).
As an example was just listening to this lecture on the vaishvamitras on an orthodox vadakalai shrIvaiShNava channel, which in the initial few minutes deals with an aindra mantra. ST_20221205_17.6.Veda_Vaibhavam_series-_Veda_Rishigal - mp3, YT
Human-like flaws such as being castrated and covered in a thousand female genitalia 🥰
Frankly, I’d never even heard of it (esp the latter) before you brought it up. It wouldn’t surprise me at all if that were the same for those like the veda-lecturer linked above. Even so, for people like us - it would not change one’s devotion to Indra in the slightest (that comes from the veda themselves) - it would just mean that the myths are to be taken less literally (as is the case of the vedic tale of viShNu being beheaded). sahasrAxa (thousand-eyed) is well known. The thousand vagina tale only explains how the thousand eyes came about. The climax/ conclusion is what people recall.
So, If you asked random people “which God has thousand eyes?” vs “which God has thousand vaginas?” you would find a huge difference. This is an experiment which you can seriously conduct walking about among hindus wherever.
As an alternative, one may check to see how many classical deptictions of Indra you find with (figuratively) 1k vagina-s vs 1k-eyes or thunderbolt etc.. That imbalance suffices to prove the point as to how he was viewed, all said and done, by purANicists
Also can look at koSha-s made by such, eg. below.
koSha examples
कल्पद्रुमः -
इन्द्रः, पुं, (इन्दतोति । इदि परमैश्वर्य्ये तस्मात् रन्- प्रत्ययः ।) देवराजः । स तु अदितिपुत्त्रः । पूर्व्व- दिक्पतिश्च । तस्य भार्य्या शची । पुत्त्राः जयन्तः १ ऋषभः २ मीढ्वांश्च ३ । अस्त्रं वज्रं । वाहनं ऐरा- वतः । पुरी अमरावती । वनं नन्दनं । तत्पर्य्यायः । मरुत्वान् २ मघवा ३ विडोजाः ४ पाकशासनः ५ वृद्धश्रवाः ६ सुनासीरः ७ पुरुहूतः ८ पुरन्दरः ९ जिष्णुः १० लेखर्षमः ११ शक्रः १२ शतमन्युः १३ दिवस्पतिः १४ सुत्रामा १५ गोत्रभित् १६ वज्री १७ वासवः १८ वृत्रहा १९ वृषा २० वास्तोस्पतिः २१ सुरपतिः २२ बलारातिः २३ शचीपतिः २४ जम्भ- भेदी २५ हरिहयः २६ स्वाराट् २७ नमुचि- सूदनः २८ संक्रन्दनः २९ दुश्च्यवनः ३० तुराषाट् ३१ मेघवाहनः ३२ आखण्डलः ३३ सहस्राक्षः ३४ ऋभुक्षा ३५ । इत्यमरः । महेन्द्रः ३६ कौशिकः ३७ पूतक्रतुः ३८ विश्वम्भरः ३९ हरिः ४० पुरदंशा ४१ शतधृतिः ४२ पृतनाषाड् ४३ अहिद्विषः ४४ । इति जटाधरः ॥ वज्रपाणिः ४५ देवराजः ४६ पर्व्वतारिः ४७ पर्य्यण्यः ४८ देवताधिपः ४९ नाकनाथः ५० पूर्व्वदिक्पतिः ५१ पुलोमारिः ५२ अर्हः ५३ प्राचीनवर्हिः ५४ तपस्तक्षः ५५ । इति शब्दरत्नावली । तस्य चतुर्द्दश नाम भेदा यथा । “इन्द्रश्च विश्वभुग् ज्ञेयो विपश्चित्तदन्तरम् । विभुः प्रभुः शिखिश्चैव तथैब च मनोजवः । तेजस्वी साम्प्रतस्त्विन्द्रो वलिर्भाव्यस्त्वनन्तरम् ॥ अद्भुतस्त्रिदिवश्चैव दशमस्त्विन्द्र उच्यते । सुशान्तिश्च सुकीर्त्तिश्च ऋतधाता दिवस्पतिः । इति भूता भविष्याश्च इन्द्रा ज्ञेयाश्चतुर्द्दश” ॥ इति देवीपुराणे कालव्यवस्थध्यायः । विष्कुम्भादिसप्तविंशतियोगान्तर्गतषड्विंशयोगः । तत्र जातफलम् । “प्रतापशीलो बलवान् गुणज्ञः श्लेष्माधिकः श्रीकमलाभ्यपेतः । किलेन्द्रयोगो यदि जन्मकाले महेन्द्रतुल्यः पुरुषः प्रसन्नः” । इति कोष्ठीप्रदीपः ॥ * ॥ अन्तरात्मा आदित्य- विशेषः । इति मेदिनी (यथा, हरिवंशे । “तत्र शक्रश्च विष्णुश्च जज्ञाते पुनरेव ह” ।) कुटजवृक्षः । रात्रिः । इति धरणी ॥ उपह्वीप- विशेषः । इति शब्दमाला ॥ परमेश्वरः । इति वेदान्तः ॥ (“इन्द्रो मायाभिः पुरुरूप ईयते” इति श्रुतिः ॥ इन्द्रियं । श्रेष्ठः । प्रथमः । यथा, नरेन्द्रो राजा । पक्षीन्द्रो गरुडः । इत्यादिः ।)
I don’t know what “literal” is supposed to mean in the context of theology
Regarding taking myths “literally” and theology - it is simple. Indra is a great God and we should sacrifice to him - because the veda-s say so. Period. No matter what purANa-s say. Now, if some tale (from brAhmaNa-s or purANa-s) appear to say something contrary to the veda (such as denigrating Indra), it means that it should be interpreted in such a way that it does not oppose what the veda instructs and enjoins. The veda-s are the ultimate authority for what is right - there is a clear hierarchy of pramANa-s. This is unlike your approach, which is to just reject the latter.
The vRtra-hatyA is held in great awe (eg. referred to in the audio - YT).
Unfortunately that is decidedly not what the majority of Hindus believe
Your sampling seems way off - low representation of classical/ traditional post-vedic hinduism. As an illustration, just look at how the questioner gets chastised here by purI shankarAchArya (YT). Your impressions seem to correspond to what that questioner was prattling, rather than what the AchArya (acknowledged by those present there to be the higher authority).
When the Purana-s make statements like “Vedic rites are inapplicable in the Kali age” &c. &c. … there’s no way for an honest person to “interpret it in such a way that it does not oppose what the Veda instructs and enjoins.”
And yet, we have solid, popular traditions, which claim to follow veda-s, purANa-s (plus even Agama-s) and emphasize the performance of vedic rites in this very age. To say that they are “dishonest” would take some piece of work - which actually examines and finds holes/ hypocracy in their methodology (which would be something).