Biblical Answer

The implications of a 'non-royal' understanding of the Messiah on the doctrine of Christology are significant. This understanding suggests that Jesus' self-understanding as the Messiah was not necessarily tied to the traditional Jewish concept of a national, political, and military leader. Instead, it may have been a deeper, spiritual understanding that emphasized the Messiah's role as a divine being. This understanding would have significant implications for Christology, as it would suggest that Jesus' divinity was not solely tied to his royal lineage, but rather to his role as the Son of God.

This understanding would also challenge the traditional Jewish expectation of a Messiah who would fulfill both the divine and human aspects of John's prediction. In this view, Jesus' self-understanding as the Messiah was not necessarily about fulfilling a specific national or political role, but rather about embodying the divine and human aspects of God's nature. This would suggest that Jesus' divinity was not solely tied to his royal lineage, but rather to his role as the Son of God, who is both fully human and fully divine.

The implications of this understanding would also be significant for the development of Christology in the early Christian tradition. It would suggest that the early Christian understanding of Jesus as the Messiah was not necessarily tied to a specific national or political context, but rather to a deeper, spiritual understanding of Jesus' role as the Son of God. This would challenge the traditional Jewish expectation of a Messiah who would fulfill a specific national or political role, and instead emphasize the Messiah's role as a divine being who embodies both the human and divine aspects of God's nature. This understanding would have significant implications for the development of Christology, and would suggest that Jesus' divinity was not solely tied to his royal lineage, but rather to his role as the Son of God.