Were the works of Homer, Aeschylus, Sophocles, etc. acting blasphemously when creating their works of fiction because they included the gods in the stories? When Homer placed dialog into Athena's mouth, was he wrong to use his creativity to make her come alive for an audience?
There were critics of such playwrights for their impertinence, not for the act of dramatization but in some cases for the content. The more conservative among the Greeks felt the god's were depicted too human. But generally the practice was popular and regarded by some as essential for the religious health of the people. In fact, the god Dionysus (you know, the water to wine god) was the patron deity of theater.
Did the earliest Christians similarly feel similarly? Early forms of the faith may have seemed unapproachable, esoteric and reserved for the initiated. (2000 years later, people still find Paul "hard to understand".) A popularizing of the faith for the masses necessitated a theatrical presentation, a more accessible method of teaching through story telling. Stories of the godman interacting with humans, demonstrating his superiority, yet having a human touch. The writings of early church fathers and writers reveal a freeness to add or subtract from those stories, which betrays an understanding of the nature of the stories lost on the populace. In a similar way the intelligentsia of the Greek and Roman world generally understood Homer and similar works as allegory and mocked the popular uncritical belief in them as 'history'.
As it happens, the very depiction of the gods as interacting directly with humans, made the gods appear smaller and, for some, paved the way for disbelief, or at least a less spiritual view of the gods. Eyes of faith replaced with literal eyes as it were. In my mind a similar process happened among Christians, the literalizing of the stories reduced them to a fixed "freeze frame" of a previously metaphysical belief system. It worked and Christianity grew, especially among the 'unlearned and ordinary'. However, many then as today find Christianity intellectually unsatisfying or indefensible for that very reason.
There have been advocates for a return to a more mystical version, but against the background of the literalist, uni-dimensional popular species of Christianity, they come across as "out of their minds". Something Paul might have heard.