In two previous posts, I introduced Michael Rydelnik’s comments on textual criticism and Messianic prophecy, and then gave an example of how this plays out in Numbers 24:7. Rydelnik’s content on textual criticism is excellent, but I expressed some reasons preventing me from agreeing with his take on Numbers 24:7. I informed him that about the post, and invited him to reply to my disagreements. Graciously, he responded with some thoughtful rebuttals, which I have shared here.
Tag: The Messianic Hope
Michael Rydelnik’s The Messianic Hope (my review) is a study on just how “messianic” the Bible is. For only being 190 pages, it covers quite a lot of territory and in this post I’d like to share what he says about the relevance of textual criticism.
It may not come as a surprise that many modern Jews, in contrast with their predecessors, deny that the Old Testament is messianic. But how should we think when the same conclusions come from modern Christian scholars? Indeed, it is becoming increasingly popular even among evangelicals, “to reject the idea that the Hebrew Bible has specific predictions of the Messiah” (p. 1). For Michael Rydelnik, Professor of Jewish Studies at Moody Bible Institute, this hits home. Rydelnik was raised an Orthodox Jew by holocaust survivors and in his fight to refute Christian interpretation of messianic prophecies Jesus won. Naturally for Rydelnik, the shift away from a messianic OT is not inconsequential: “it is essential to understand the Hebrew Bible as messainic” (p. 12). The Messianic Hope is his attempt to reclaim the OT as book directly anticipating the Messiah.