For instance, How to Read the Bible: History, Prophecy, Literature- Why Modern Readers Need to Know the Difference, and What It Means for Faith Today by Steven L. McKenzie might be more of a problem for Pat's teachers.* The Bible is more meaningful if you truly understand what went into its creation, both for the believer and general reader.
Prof. McKenzie argues that one reason why you have to know the difference is that a true understanding of the reason for let's say Jonah or Daniel can lead to a stronger faith because you realize that it is not supposed to be taken as literal history. One might add, though he doesn't emphasize the point, someone can also better criticize its content by realizing that this alone is not a reason to totally ignore it as religious dogma.
He also is a bit too positive. Let's say Chronicles "creatively" re-wrote history found in other works (and sources that are lost) to promote a certain religious principle. Particularly in a day when only a few read, many people would not realize this is what was being done. It is one thing for Greek historians (or Acts) to create speeches that say what certain people are assumed to have said. It is quite different (or more problematic) to delete, 1984-like (as did Egyptian palace historians too), uncomfortable history. The result is that faith is based on fiction. I don't know how much the general reader (or believer) even then knew just what was being done.
The author neutrally notes what is done and lets others judge but the implication stands that judging too harshly is wrong. One other thing, which again should not lead someone not to read this interesting approachable volume, is that the misunderstandings are at times a bit exaggerated. For instance, he explains how Pauline epistles were specifically tied to certain situations. This is true, but the reason why they were collected was that they also put forth certain basic doctrinal discussions that are useful for the general Christian reader.
---
* See next entry for the reference.