The Edge of Glory has special significance. The chief importance is the message, but also note the importance of the method. The redemptive-historical approach claims to study God’s revelation of Jesus Christ from all of Scripture. The principle sounds good, but I have not seen it done correctly. Theologians use it to limit what people are permitted to believe about God. Instead of reading the Bible as an unfolding of the plan of God and a revelation of Christ, in their hands this approach becomes a method to reduce God into what they wish to think about him. This betrays a fundamental estrangement from God and from Scripture, and from literacy. They teach the people: “Whatever the Bible says, it is really talking ONLY about this. Regardless of what it records and what it promises, it is never intended to say anything outside of this small circle I draw for you.”
This is the opposite of what Scripture is intended to do, and the opposite of the effect of a redemptive-historical approach to Scripture. The Bible is God’s revelation of his nature and his mind to us, and he is bigger than us in every way. Therefore, the Bible should expand what we believe about God, how God relates to us and the world, and how we should live by faith in Christ. Theologians use the redemptive-historical approach to Scripture to reduce a big Book into a small Jesus. Literacy is wasted on them. Literacy has become a weapon of Satan in their hands. Whether or not we call it the redemptive-historical approach, the proper reading of Scripture will begin with the knowledge that the Book is a revelation from God, and then listen to him teach us big knowledge about this God.
The standard redemptive-historical approach to Scripture usually permits the reader to believe less about Jesus Christ when he has finished the analysis, because no matter what the Bible says in a certain place, it is really not the point, since the point is only Jesus Christ. And the only Jesus permitted is the one we already believe before we read the text. It becomes a method to discard most of Scripture instead of a method to learn from Scripture and expand our knowledge and appreciation of God. This is grotesque. We do not need to read the whole Bible just to know that there is such a thing as Jesus Christ. We begin knowing that it is a revelation of Jesus Christ, and by reading the history of redemption, we learn more and more about him. By reading the Bible, we are supposed to learn his big thoughts about himself and about us, instead of reducing all the things that he says into our small thoughts about him and ourselves — and then call that scholarship! This is a major difference between a theology of faith and a theology of unbelief.
The usual religious frauds reduce the Bible into what they can accept, but the Bible expands us and increases us. As demonstrated in The Edge of Glory, when it is used to address unbelief, the redemptive-historical approach to Scripture also represents God’s polemics against his people, or those who claim to be his people. Stephen also gave an example of this in Acts 7. Most of those who extol the redemptive-historical approach to Scripture do not know that the method is in fact a testimony against them. They claim to preach Christ from every page. Which Christ? What does this page say about Christ? But they teach their own Christ, and disregard what each page says about Christ. If a page of Scripture talks about the Christ who heals in answer to faith, somehow it does not really teach this Christ that will heal in answer to faith, but it teaches only the Christ they allow, a Christ that has nothing to do with healing in answer to faith. If a page of Scripture talks about the Christ who controls nature to help his people, somehow you can never expect this to happen to you, because it is not about you, and not even about what Christ does on that page, but again, only the Christ that they have already decided to permit apart from the text. If another page of Scripture talks about the Christ who baptizes his people with the Holy Spirit so that they would receive miraculous and prophetic powers, you are an uneducated self-centered fanatic if you think it means you can receive anything like what it promises, but it is still only about the much smaller Christ already written in stone by their tradition. Thus they crucify Jesus Christ afresh, and what appears reverent in principle has become one of the most satanic attacks against the word of God.
Suppose you are a Vincent Cheung otaku. You read everything he writes, and everything that anyone writes about him. You have been to “Veminary,” where those who know nothing about Vincent Cheung try to teach you everything about him. You have a degree in Cheungology. Your conclusion is that everything said by him and everything said about him is summed up in this: Vincent Cheung likes cheesecake. Wait, doesn’t everyone know this? But you know more. You smugly inform others that Vincent Cheung likes New York cheesecake and white chocolate raspberry cheesecake. Perhaps the only thing he likes more than cheesecake is his wife, because when his wife brings him those weak fluffy Japanese cheesecakes, he smiles and enjoys them anyway, because he is eating with her. So you are an expert in Vincent Cheung. But still, you want to know more.
After many back alley negotiations and shady dealings, you acquired an out-of-print copy of The Autobiography of Vincent Cheung. At last! The self-revelation of Vincent Cheung! The unfolding of the drama of the adventures of the Chinese preacher! You start reading, and soon come upon a chapter on Cheung’s family background and early schooling. You think, “He started enjoying cheesecake even as a kid.” Another chapter discusses his interest in spiritual things and in the supernatural. You say to yourself, “As I thought, by the time he was a teenager, his interest in cheesecake had reached a supernatural level.” Then he talks about how he came to Christ, and perhaps, even his various visions and commission from God. And you shake your head: “So eventually the cheesecake started speaking to him.” He explains the circumstances around a confrontation with a church that had departed from the word of God. You say, “He gets angry when someone makes a bad cheesecake.” He explains how God supernaturally arranged his marriage. You exclaim, “He even had miracle cheesecake encounters!” He moved from one country to another. “He moved from a cheesecake to another cheesecake!”
The book excites you so much you share it with your best friend: “Read this. This fellow is even more obsessed with cheesecake than I thought. It’s fantastic.” After a week, you ask him, “Which chapter intrigued you the most?” He says, “Well, I suppose the chapter where he talks about the meteor hitting the earth and caused that tsunami that wiped out an entire continent.” You become exasperated. You rebuke him and say: “Don’t be so off-centered in your exegesis! Don’t be so shallow! This is not about the meteor! This is not about the tsunami! This is not about the continent! This is not about you or me! Don’t you get it? This is his AUTOBIOGRAPHY. It is ALL about him. Practice Cheung-centered exegesis. The meteor, the tsunami, the continent — all of it was about how much he likes cheesecake!” Your friend: “He does say he likes cheesecake in another chapter, but this chapter does not even mention himself or cheesecake. And if he has written this book to tell us about himself, can’t he tell us whatever he wants about himself? Such as his thoughts about the meteor disaster?” You become violent and punch him in the face: “NO!” Your friend, crying now, “Why…?” You walk out and slam the door: “BECAUSE HE LIKES CHEESECAKE!!!”
If you are like this, do you even need to be literate? In fact, if you are like this, can we say that you respect Vincent Cheung? Can we say that you like him at all? He is just some cheesecake-obsessed symbol in your mind that might or might not have anything to do with reality. But this is how the theologians of so-called biblical theology, or the redemptive-historical approach, reduce Scripture into only what they permit. These people do not belong in churches and seminaries, but in insane asylums. If Vincent Cheung writes an autobiography or a story that is supposed to reveal himself on every page, then listen to what he tells you about himself on this page or that page, instead of reducing everything that he says into what you already decide to think about him. He might be an avid reader, a tennis player, a devoted husband, a lifelong preacher — but you will only let him enjoy cheesecake. Now if you are stubborn about Vincent Cheung or any man, the damage is limited. But with God, this same stubbornness can make the difference between heaven and hell. If God has given us a Book that is supposed to reveal himself on every page, then listen to what he tells you about himself — on each specific page. He might not be only that two or three things your worthless religious heritage allows you to believe.