re: Don't take the Bible literally says scholar who brought earliest Latin analysis of Gospels

Also...I'd love to see this ancient bishop's writings in their true context. History tends to regard the man in question as a believer in Arianism. If this is the case, it's quite possible that the man's commentaries on the passages of the Gospels are tainted with his own personal interpretations.

We have plenty, and I mean PLENTY of writings from this same period from leaders in the Church. Just about all of them regard the events portrayed in the Gospels as historical fact. I'm sure Fortunatianus did, too. Otherwise he wouldn't have risen to the rank of bishop.

He may merely refer to the passages where Christ claims to be one with the Father as parables. That would have fallen in line with his Arianistic beliefs that Christ and God were two separate entities.