Biblical Answer

The implications of a 'non-royal' understanding of the Messiah on the doctrine of Christology are significant. This understanding challenges the traditional view of Jesus as the King of Israel and the Son of God. A non-royal understanding of the Messiah implies that Jesus' messianic claim was not based on his royal lineage or his fulfillment of a national, political, and military restoration of Israel. Instead, it suggests that Jesus' messianic claim was rooted in his unique relationship with God the Father, as revealed in his sayings and teachings.

A non-royal understanding of the Messiah also raises questions about the significance of Jesus' titles, such as "Messiah" and "Son of God." In the New Testament, these titles are often used interchangeably, implying that Jesus' messianic claim was closely tied to his divine sonship. However, if Jesus' messianic claim was not based on his royal lineage, then the significance of these titles must be re-evaluated. A non-royal understanding of the Messiah suggests that Jesus' messianic claim was more focused on his role as the Son of God, rather than as the King of Israel.

The implications of a non-royal understanding of the Messiah on the doctrine of Christology are far-reaching. It challenges the traditional view of Jesus as the King of Israel and the Son of God, and raises questions about the significance of his titles and sayings. However, it also opens up new possibilities for understanding Jesus' messianic claim and its relationship to his divine sonship. A non-royal understanding of the Messiah suggests that Jesus' messianic claim was rooted in his unique relationship with God the Father, and that his role as the Son of God was central to his messianic claim. This understanding has significant implications for Christology, and highlights the need for a more nuanced and complex understanding of Jesus' messianic claim and its relationship to his divine sonship.