Christocentric, Theocentric, Christotelic?

Peter Mead at his Biblical Preaching Blog has an interesting discussion concerning whether reference to Jesus is an essential component of a definition of Bible exposition. He identifies two possible positions (1) Christocentric, (2) Theocentric. I left a comment noting that perhaps there is a third position that merits consideration, namely, a position advocated recently by Peter Enns and others, namely, “Christotelic.” According to Enns, “The OT is a story that is going somewhere, which is what the Apostles are at great pains to show. It is the OT as a whole, particularly in its grand themes, that finds its telos, its completion, in Christ. This is not to say that the vibrancy of the OT witness now comes to an end, but that—on the basis of apostolic authority—it finds its proper goal, purpose, telos, in that event by which God himself determined to punctuate his covenant: Christ” (“Apostolic Hermeneutics and an Evangelical Doctrine of Scripture: Moving Beyond a Modernist Impasse,” Westminster Theological Journal 65 [2003], 277). Personally, I am not sure that I agree with this approach, but I am hearing and seeing it more and more.