AZPaul3 writes:
I submit your books were written as fiction, allegory or delusion, and most certainly not as objective reporting.
GDR writes:
Fiction is quite differnt than allegory or delusion.
Oops. I need a proof reader. Left out a comma. It's supposed to be a take your pick: fiction, allegory, or delusion.
An allegory, like a Biblical parable, is a story that is truthful but not in a historical sense but that it represents a literal truth.
I challenge your view of allegory. Allegory often is just as abstract and figurative as fiction. The difference is that a fiction owns up to being fiction while an allegory often tries to hide it.
Whether written after being repeatedly embellished after decades of ponder intended to build on the myth, or, written as a figurative treatment/symbolical narrative intended to build on the myth, or, written by some religio-nutcase gone wacko wanting to show his own importance in the myth. These seem to be the most reasonable choices available.
The Gospels, as pointed out specifically by both Luke and John, were written to be accepted as truthful. That of course isn't evidence that they are historically accurate, but it is evidence that they were not written as fiction, but were written to convey an account of events, that were intended to be understood as historically accurate.
Ok, so, religio-nutcase gone wacko it is then.