I've long been fascinated by the use of the term "narrative" in progressive theological circles.
Usually, the word is used in one of two contexts, either to bash more conservative theological perspectives as "too focused on literalism" or "missing the scope of the narrative".
What fascinates me about it is that most who make a big deal about the narrative of God's redemptive history are also those who insist that Genesis 1-11 has little or no basis in actual history. Adam, the Garden of Eden and the creation account were written for pre-scientific cultures as a way of explaining that the Hebrew God was better than all the other gods, and the accounts have no bearing on the central focus of the New Testament on Christ inaugurating a New Kingdom.
Why is this fascinating?
Because what they have done is completely altered the narrative. Those who insist we only focus on the narrative have altered its very meaning.
An analogy is in order.
