Biblical Answer

The implications of a 'non-royal' understanding of the Messiah on the doctrine of Christology are far-reaching. If Jesus' understanding of himself as the Messiah was not based on a royal lineage, but rather on a deeper reading of his Scriptures, it challenges the traditional view of the Messiah as a conquering king. This understanding would suggest that the Messiahship of Jesus is not solely tied to his royal titles or his Davidic lineage, but rather to his role as the Son of God and the Savior of humanity. This would imply that the doctrine of Christology should focus more on the divine and human aspects of Jesus' nature, rather than solely on his royal status.

This non-royal understanding of the Messiah would also have significant implications for the way we understand Jesus' teachings and actions. If Jesus did not see himself as the traditional Jewish Messiah, but rather as the Son of God, it would suggest that his teachings and actions were not primarily focused on establishing a Jewish kingdom, but rather on proclaiming the kingdom of God and the salvation of humanity. This would challenge the traditional view of Jesus as a Jewish reformer or a national leader, and instead present him as a divine figure who came to redeem humanity.

In conclusion, a 'non-royal' understanding of the Messiah would have significant implications for the doctrine of Christology. It would challenge the traditional view of the Messiah as a conquering king and instead present Jesus as the Son of God and the Savior of humanity. This understanding would also challenge the way we understand Jesus' teachings and actions, and present him as a divine figure who came to redeem humanity. This would require a re-evaluation of the traditional views of Christology and a deeper understanding of Jesus' nature and mission.