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