Cover not available

Article published In: Metaphor in Religion and Spirituality
Edited by Stephen Pihlaja
[Metaphor and the Social World 7:1] 2017
► pp. 87–102

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

“When Noah built the ark…”

Metaphor and biblical stories in Facebook preaching

 | Newman University, UK
Published online: 20 July 2017
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/msw.7.1.06pih
Abstract
This article investigates the use of biblical stories and text in the preaching of Joshua Feuerstein, a popular Facebook evangelist, and focuses on how biblical stories are used to position the viewer in comparison to biblical characters and texts. Taking a discourse dynamics approach (Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (Eds.). (2010). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar), a corpus of 8 short videos (17 minutes 34 seconds) and their comments (2,295) taken from the Facebook are analysed first, for the presence of metaphorical language and stories taken from the Bible. Second, they are analysed for the role of metaphor in the narrative positioning (Bamberg, M. (1997). Positioning between structure and performance. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 335–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar) of the viewer, particularly as it relates to Gibbs’s notion of ‘allegorises’, or the ‘allegoric impulse’ (Gibbs, R. (2011). The Allegorical Impulse. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(2), 121–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar). The corresponding text comments from the videos are then also analysed for the presence of the same biblical metaphor, focusing on how commenters interact with the metaphor and Feuerstein’s positioning of them. Findings show that biblical metaphorical language is used to position viewers and their struggles in the context of larger storylines that compare everyday experiences to biblical texts. This comparison can happen both in explicit narrative positioning of viewers with explicit reference to the Bible, and implicit positioning, through the use of unmarked biblical language. Analysis of viewer comments shows that use of metaphorical language is successful in building a sense of camaraderie and shared belief among the viewer and Feuerstein, as well as viewers with one another.
Article outline
  • 1.Background
    • 1.1Metaphor dynamics
    • 1.2Narrative positioning
    • 1.3Metaphor in online interaction
  • 2.Data collection and method
  • 3.Analysis
    • 3.1Use of scriptural metaphor
    • 3.2Metaphor and positioning
  • 4.Conclusion
  • References
References (32)
References
Allison, D. C., Jr. 1987. The structure of the Sermon on the Mount. Journal of Biblical Literature, 1061, 423–445. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bamberg, M. (1997). Positioning between structure and performance. Journal of Narrative and Life History, 7(1–4), 335–342. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Considering counter narratives. In M. Bamberg & M. Andrews (Eds.), Considering counter narratives: Narrating, resisting, making sense (pp. 351–371). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bass, G. M. 1982. The evolution of the story sermon. Word and World, 21, 183–188.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, L. (2003). Metaphor in educational research. London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2011). Metaphor and reconciliation: The discourse dynamics of empathy in post-conflict conversations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Low, G. (1999). Researching and applying metaphor. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, L., & Maslen, R. (Eds.). (2010). Metaphor analysis: Research practice in applied linguistics, social sciences and the humanities. London: Equinox.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cameron, L., Maslen, R., Todd, Z., Maule, J., Stratton, P., & Stanley, N. (2009). The discourse dynamics approach to metaphor and metaphor-led discourse analysis. Metaphor and Symbol, 24(2), 63–89. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davis, G. 1958. Design for Preaching, Minneapolis, MA: Fortress Publishers.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Davies, B., & Harré, R. (1990). Positioning: The discursive production of selves. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour, 20(1), 43–63. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Feuerstein, J. (2014a). Untitled Facebook Video. Retrieved from [URL]
(2014b). Untitled Facebook Video. Retrieved from [URL]
Foucault, M. (1981). The orders of discourse. In R. Young (Ed.), Untying the text: A post-structuralist reader. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gibbs, R. (2011). The Allegorical Impulse. Metaphor and Symbol, 26(2), 121–130. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gillespie, M., Herbert, D. E. J., & Greenhill, A. (2013). Social media and religious change. Berlin: De Gruyter. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harré, R., Moghaddam, F., Cairnie, T. P., Rothbart, D., & Sabat, S. R. (2009). Recent advances in positioning theory. Theory & Psychology, 19(1), 5–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harré, R., & van Langenhove, L. (1998). Positioning theory: Moral contexts of intentional action. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchings, T. (2007). Creating church online: A case-study approach to religious experience. Studies in World Christianity, 13(3), 243–260. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Jensen, R. A. 1980. Telling the story: Variety and imagination in preaching, Minneapolis, MA: Augsburg Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39(10), 1123–1134. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marwick, A., & boyd, d. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Musolff, A. (2004). Metaphor and political discourse: Analogical reasoning in debates about Europe. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2006). Metaphor scenarios in public discourse. Metaphor and Symbol, 21(1), 23–38. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noll, M. A., Bebbington, D. W., & Rawlyk, G. A. (1994). Evangelicalism: Comparative studies of popular protestantism in North America, the British Isles, and beyond, 1700–1990: Oxford Univ. Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Packer, J. I. (1978). The evangelical anglican identity problem: An analysis. Oxford: Latimer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Pihlaja, S. (2013). ‘It’s all red ink’: The interpretation of biblical metaphor among Evangelical Christian YouTube users. Language and Literature, 22(2), 103–117. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2014). Antagonism on YouTube: Metaphor in online discourse. London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Siegel, J., Dubrovsky, V., Kiesler, S., & McGuire, T. W. (1986). Group processes in computer-mediated communication. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 37(2), 157–187. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Watson, G. 2014. The sermon in three acts: The rhetoric of cinema and the art of narrative biblical exposition. Revista Batista Pioneira, 31, 193–210.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Zanotto, M. S., Cameron, L., & Cavalcanti, M. C. (Eds.). (2008). Confronting metaphor in use: An applied linguistic approach. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (6)

Cited by six other publications

Zakharchenko, Artem
2025. Advantages of the connective strategic narrative during the Russian–Ukrainian war. Frontiers in Political Science 7 DOI logo
Chandra, Rohitash, Abhishek Tiwari, Naman Jain & Sushrut Badhe
2024. Large Language Models for Metaphor Detection: Bhagavad Gita and Sermon on the Mount. IEEE Access 12 ► pp. 84452 ff. DOI logo
Oyebode, Oluwabunmi O. & Foluke O. Unuabonah
2022. “Noah’s Family Was on Lockdown”: Multimodal Metaphors in Religious Coronavirus-Related Internet Memes in the Nigerian WhatsApp Space. Metaphor and Symbol 37:4 ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Zakharchenko, Artem & Olena Zakharchenko
2021. The Influence of the ‘Tomos Narrative’ as a Part of the Ukrainian National and Strategic Narrative. Corvinus Journal of Sociology and Social Policy ► pp. 163 ff. DOI logo
Richardson, Peter, Stephen Pihlaja, Miori Nagashima, Masako Wada, Makoto Watanabe & Baramee Kheovichai
2020. Blasphemy and persecution: Positioning in an inter-religious discussion. Text & Talk 40:1 ► pp. 75 ff. DOI logo
HAN, HUAMEI
2018. Studying Religion and Language Teaching and Learning: Building a Subfield. The Modern Language Journal 102:2 ► pp. 432 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 27 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue