"There I will sprout the horn of David. I will arrange a lamp for my anointed. I will clothe his enemies with disgrace, but over him his consecration will blossom." -- (Ps.132:17,18) ARTB

A note from A. Frances Werner:

This verse was sent out a week or so ago with comments about SPROUT.  This time, I want to mention some important information about the last few words, CONSECRATION and BLOSSOM.  It's a rainy day here in the midwest, no gardening today! Take a look at Leviticus 8:9.  This describes Moses as he dressed Aaron for his consecration as high priest: 

He set the mitre over his head. He set the gold blossom of holy consecration over the mitre area as Yahweh commanded Moses.

This gold blossom was inscribed with the words "Sanctuary of Yahweh", and was set over the head of the high priest.  So this verse from Psalm 132 clearly shows that the Anointed (which in Hebrew is Messiah) SPROUTED from the kingly line of David (tribe of Judah) but also was CONSECRATED as a high priest, which was always from the tribe of Levi, directly in the line of Aaron.  

Today, we easily accept the notion that the Messiah would be KING and PRIEST.  And although maternal heritage is recognized in the Hebrew world, this combination was virtually impossible in the Hebrew mindset, because the father of the Messiah could NOT be from two different tribes.   So how could this verse be interpreted at the time?

The key is knowing that the word CONSECRATE in Hebrew is NAZAR, which is also the root of the the word NAZARITE, the vows taken by a person to consecrate themselves to God, with limitations on cutting hair and drinking grape products.  Samson, from the tribe of Dan, was a Nazarite from the day of his birth.     

This is my conjecture:  I have always thought that the Pharisees and Sadducees were unfairly "picking on" Jesus about things like hand washing, drinking, and not carefully observing the Sabbath.  However, I now believe that they were seriously checking out whether this man from the line of David could be the Messiah.  I believe that they thought to fulfill the verse in Psalm 132, that he would have had to have taken a NAZARITE vow or be CONSECRATED since birth.  They essentially kept asking him:  Why aren't you a Nazarite???  From their perspective, he was missing half of the qualifications to be the Messiah.

That also explains the banter about him being from NAZARETH, which is based upon the same word.  Being from NAZARETH did not make him a NAZARITE in the sense of the vow.

So how can the Messiah fulfill both parts?  There is only one way--to have the human heritage from the line of David, plus the CONSECRATION and Godly heritage from his father, Yahweh, as the high priest.