I was not here speaking of the overall biblical narrative. That has been addressed here before.

As far as why I have found the destruction of said "meta-narratives" appealing? For one the philosophy behind it is compelling. Ecclesiologically it helps to deconstruct the exertion of power. For instance the Roman Catholic claim to have the authority of Jesus Christ himself, or even the Reformed idea that they are the ones who really know what the Bible means. Narratives themselves are generally foundational to the establishment of the identity of a community, but it is the interpretation of history giving that community legitimacy or power which is suspect. They are provisional and not unassaliable.

Theologically and Scripturally it lets the Bible be the multi-faceted book that it is, it does not allow one interpretation to be the end-all.

I was primarily refering here to the new book "The Great Emergence" by Phylis Tickle. Her basic premise is that the Church goes through a major transition every five hundred years, and we are going through one of those now. Her numbers are a little fuzzy, as are the significance of some of her examples. She ties the whole of Christian history together into a narrative Which then gives legitimacy to some theological and moral developments going on now. That is she creates a narrative and makes it a legitimizing narrative. Because of it’s close ties to the Emergent Village community it also ties them into this Great Emergence, which, in her defense, she does claim is only a part of what is going on now.

As someone who identifies with the Emerging Community I have problems with this and feel that it’s continued assertion may create a whole new Emergent Village identity to which I am not sold.