Re: Metavista, narrative, and the historical-critical project

Oddly enough, though I’m sure I’m not the only one to have made the connection, I headed the editorial of our in-house church magazine recently with the comment "The current turmoil in the financial markets has something of an apocalyptic Revelation 18 quality to it." This would be easier for me to say than for you Andrew, since I see Revelation 18 as having a future fulfilment, rather than referring primarily to past events. I do see greed (and fear) as providing the underlying cause for the markets experiencing their nemesis at the moment.

"How do we determine what constitutes a legitimate application of a historically contextualized story to our own circumstances?" I would define analogy as making a comparison, and allegory as asserting a hidden meaning which can be applied outside the historical context. I was somewhat scornful of allegory as a means of interpretation, but actually, the bible itself seems to legitimise allegory as a tool of interpretation - eg in Galatians 4:21-31. But I do think the primary valid method of application from one historical context to another is analogy.

What principles would one apply to make "a legitimate application of a historically contextualized story to our own circumstances?" An overarching principle would be the consistent behaviour of God according to his unchanging character. The way in which God dealt with Abraham is not dissimilar, in principle, with how he deals with his people today. Some notorious exceptions, or problematic examples notwithstanding, I’m sure this is how the bible has always been interpreted, and the OT regarded as having contemporary application.