According to the author of 1 Samuel, God wanted to be King over Israel. However, Israel wanted a human king like other nations. Therefore, this new movement fully institutes the reasons why it can be said that the Messiah is God. Herein, it is demonstrated that a totally Divine Messiah (an Anointed King God) exists in the plot of the Hebrew Bible. The point here is to recognize him.
The opening portion presents new arguments that undo scholarly opinions that do not recognize the thread which runs through the Abram covenant, the Abrahamic covenant, the Mosaic covenant, and the Davidic covenant. Biblical scholars see those covenantal Promises as unconditional guarantees. However, it will be shown here why each of those covenants has caveats, which caused the land Promise to be readdressed several times. Since a sworn oath was broken repeatedly, a new covenant became necessary. Establishing that concept creates a context in which to shift the focus away from geography (the land of Canaan), so that more attention can be paid to theology (Messianism).
Subsequently, an original case is made that demonstrates why "Messianism" in the narrative of the Hebrew Bible can be seen in another way. Given the details of the Davidic covenant, both Jewish and Christian religions have good reason to traditionally conclude that "The Messiah" must come from the patriarchal lineage of David. So, the point is here is not to argue for or against the traditional view. The real point is to point out why Messianism seems to not be limited to the patriarchal lineage of Davidic, as in some instances, Messianism in the Hebrew Bible has nothing to do with the Davidic context at all.
First, it is pointed out that the idea of a "messiah" probably did not occur to the prophets. Then, it will be illustrated why it is difficult to discern, or maybe even impossible tell, if a Davidic "Messiah" can materialize. Herein, it is illustrated why the authors of the Isaiah, Jerimiah, and Zechariah were not asserting that any "messianic" figure in their narratives was from David.
Conveniently, the author of Matthew asserted that Jesus, a person who met his Messianic expectations, was in the patriarchal lineage of David and was conceived by the Holy Spirit. It seems that the author did this because he was trying to appeal to a Jewish audience. However, virgin births real, or not, exclude persons from that scenario from being "The Messiah" according to Jewish tradition because he would have no patriarchal blood ties to the line of David. Judaism seems to be asserting that it is implausible for a human being to be a flesh and blood son of David and the Son of God at the same time. Jewish tradition asserts that even if a person's father is God, he is excluded from "Messiahship" because he has no patriarchal blood ties to the Davidic line.
For that reason, a new explanation is offered that points out why Matthew's version of the Jesus story seems to have hurt, not helped, Jesus' case for satisfying the traditional requirement for being the "The Messiah" being in the patriarchal lineage of David. As the story goes, Jesus was born of a virgin.
Therefore, this book presents an original case to illustrate that there is a Messiah in the biblical storyline that is not in the Davidic line, but instead appears to be fully Divine. Essentially, the biblical narrative is asserting that the Messiah is God.
