Woodeye

When Solomon ascended David's throne, God promised him that his kingdom would last forever, and God also specificly declared Solomon to be His son.
Solomon was both the "son of David", and the "son of God", but the kingdom, which included all 12 tribes of Israel, ceased to exist at the end of Solomon's reign.
For some strange reason, the fact that God's promise was broken, did not seem to bother the Hebrews, and a 'national saviour' king immediately became necessary to restore God's broken promise and the kingdom which included all the children of Israel and all the promised land.
800 years of insignificant history passed and Jesus Christ, which interpreted in context means "saviour king", arrived on the scene. He went about telling the Jews, who had been watching and waiting for kingdom restoration for almost 1000 years, the "good news" that "the kingdom is at hand.
His followers prematurely gave him Solomon's titles; "son of David" and "son of God", and he died in a heroic attempt to oust the Romans and restore the Davidic kingdom.
Presently, almost 3000 years have passed since the kingdom ceased to exist, and the status is still quo.
The man called Jesus, if he existed at all, was simply a slice of Jewish history.
What do you think?

Godless Dave

A sad aspect of human nature. It's prophesied that Solomon and his descendants will rule Israel forever. It doesn't happen, so do people abandon the prophecy and the belief structure it originated in? Hell no, they make up another prophecy! Then Jesus comes, and seems like he might fulfil the second prophecy. He doesn't, and is executed. So do people give up on the first two prophecies? Nope, they come up with a third one, that Jesus will come back in their lifetimes to set everything straight - not just with Israel, but the whole world!

Well he didn't come back in their lifetimes. So did people give up on this whole Jesus thing? No, sir! They just reinterpreted his sayings to mean that he would come back sometime in the future, but we don't know when!

You can fool most of the people most of the time.

Woodeye

Yes. If bible scholars would just be fundamental, and interpret according to the greater context of bible history, they would come to a completely unorthodox conclusion I'm sure.