I've finished with the Book of Ezekiel and its detailed vision of a new temple and a new nation.  Sadly, it was a vision that I would imagine was precious to the prophet, since he was a priest himself and this was a hope presented to him that would not be fulfilled in his lifetime.  As far as I know, Ezekiel remained in exile for the rest of his life.  Some maintain that the vision at the end of this book is symbolic, through detailed.  Others maintain that it is for a time yet to come.  We shall see.  Perhaps one think I can take away from this is that there should be elements of Scripture that are "not yet" and "for a time yet to come".  We are an incomplete work and our world is fallen and not yet what it shall be.  Perhaps that should be reflected in Scripture.

I've just started working on the Book of Luke, a wonderful Gospel prepared, so I'm taught, by a level-headed Greek physician.  I stopped short after reading just the first two verses...

1  Inasmuch as many have taken in hand to set in order a narrative of those things which have been fulfilled among us,

2  just as those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word delivered them to us,

Note:  Luke seems here to claim that he has eyewitnesses to the life of Jesus among his sources.  That seems different from the theory that Luke had a variety of traditions that he had modified to fit together into a good story.

The Apostle Paul, in his brief recitation of the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15:1-6, mentions those who were eye-witnesses to the risen Christ.  

Could both of these books be examples of fiction pretending to be researched presentations of actual events?  

If so, what does mean to the value of the Gospel?  

What if they, as I suspect, were actually based on interviews with eye witnesses?