I’m just starting this book, so I look forward to how he’s going to develop his point. However, I thought this was a provocative way to start the book, especially in light of this discussion:
Biblical scholars come at the issue of interpretation from a variety of presuppositions and approaches. While critical scholarship has, by and large, abandoned biblical inspiration and adopted methodologies such as source criticism, form criticism, and tradition history, evangelical scholarship has maintained a commitment to the inspiration and authority of Scripture. In their struggle to determine the meaning of biblical texts, some evangelical scholars have adopted a historical reading of the text that often minimizes direct messianic prophecy.
In contrast to the historical interpretation of the Bible, there is a growing movement among some biblical scholars to approach the text of Scripture by focusing not upon how the text developed historically but rather upon its final canonical form. As a result of carefully examining the compositional strategies of the biblical authors themselves and reading the Scriptures according to their final form and in conjunction with innerbiblical interpretations, there is a growing tendency to see the Old Testament as an eschatological, messianic text.
 Michael Rydelnik, The Messianic Hope: Is the Hebrew Bible Really Messianic?, xv.