Yes I think we ve achieved understanding I think the distinction I make is useful for purposes of clarity since the liberal Christians who agree with what you called the historical school are in doing so taking a controversial to Christians stance on the inspiration of scripture They are rejecting the book s own claim to be foretelling the future and agreeing with the criticism which classifies it as a pseudo prophecy It would be hard to include that as a school of interpretation without violating NPOV as to questions of authority inspiration etc