Why reject metanarratives? Because the espousing of a metanarrative entails an imperialistic stance toward those little sub-narratives that trouble your Big Overarching Story. Metanarratives leave little space for narratives that see things differently—in effect, metanarratives pushed to their extreme erase the possibility of those surprising and troubling little sub-narratives that are inside and around the metanarrative. Metanarratives smooth all the bumps and potholes out into a nice and neat Big Story.

A sub-narrative that has been developed very little and is almost completely squeezed out of the Big Story is that Jesus was not a Christian. We know that the name “Christian” was bestowed on followers after Jesus’ death and resurrection. But we don’t ever talk about what that possibility might mean to us because our metanarrative don’t allow that possibility to even be a matter of discussion.

You can see this imperialistic action in concrete terms if you go to most any church and point out that Jesus was not a “Christian.” That possibility just simply does not make sense to anyone operating inside the traditional Christian metanarrative. And since it doesn’t make sense, that subnarrative is quickly disposed of.