Non-fiction literature *IS* historical
For a non-fiction text, a proper literary analysis ought to be no different than historical analysis. Therefore, if we distinguish between "literary" and "historical" interpretations of the same text, do we not essentially fictionalize the contents of that text?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Recently Popular
-
The Roman registration of Herod's Kingdom is historically bizarre, and could not have been part of any "worldwide" registration. For Caesar ...
-
(so called): Did it really exist before Acts 10:45? If it did, it was fully inclusive of all believers in Christ, at that time. Or, to put t...
-
My main interest in Lysanias, tetrarch of Abilene, began in hopes of finding a comparative case study (however minuscule) to make with Hero...
-
My answer, in 2 paragraphs, an exercise suggested by Brian LePort: After nearly a decade of apostle-ing churches, having founded at leas...
-
Chronology on the Roman Empire is much easier to sort through than chronology on the New Testament for one simple reason – because ancient h...
-
If Nero got to hear Luke's version of Jesus' wilderness temptations, one must wonder (I think) what Nero thought about Satan claiming to be ...
-
The miraculous is always "unlikely", but reported miracles are not always "improbable". Yes, both statements are true; it's just difficul...
-
Why do conservative scholars defend the Gospels as historically reliable yet deny that it's possible to write a reliable History based on th...
-
Tyndale Publishing was founded because Ken Taylor wanted to help people understand the Bible in simple ways. The Living Bible evolved into ...
0 comments:
Post a Comment