Messiah son of Joseph: 25 Questions and Answers

Since I published Messiah ben Joseph in 2016 I often get questions about this mysterious Messiah son of Joseph. Here are some of the questions I am asked most often and the answers.

This is quite a long video. So, if you want the full info, stay tuned. Or if you want an overview of the questions that interest you most, you’ll get the list of questions and their time-slots down below. Let’s go.

1. Who is Messiah son of Joseph?

Messiah son of Joseph (or Messiah ben Joseph) is a Messiah that we find in rabbinic literature. He is a Messiah who comes from Galilee to die, pierced by ruthless foes, at the gate of Jerusalem. Upon his death, Israel are scattered amidst the nations. But his death confounds Satan, atones for sin, and abolishes death itself. And then he is raised to life again.

Now when I say this Messiah appears in rabbinic literature we are not talking about one or two texts. No. He appears in scores of texts, in hundreds and hundreds of references. In the Targums and Talmud; in the homiletic and exegetic midrashim; in the apocalyptic midrashim and the geonic responsa; in the hekhalot literature and the Zohar; in the rishonim and the aḥaronim. Messiah son of Joseph is a standard and important part of rabbinic belief.

Messiah son of Joseph is a quite distinct person from his better-known companion, Messiah son of David (Messiah ben David), the Messiah from the tribe of Judah. The rabbis say Messiah son of Joseph will come first and prepare the way for Messiah son of David. But Messiah ben Joseph will die in battle with the forces of evil. Then he will be raised and will rule together with Messiah son of David.

2. I thought that Jews don’t believe in a dying Messiah. Is that not true?

Yes, that is a widespread belief. But it’s not true. The Jewish rabbis always believed in Messiah ben Joseph. And they always believed that he would die to atone for sins and bring in the redemption. But they did not want Christians to know that they believed this. Because if they let on that they believed in a dying Galilean Messiah, then Christians would say, “So why don’t you believe in Jesus?”

But, in fact, they had an even bigger problem when Christians did begin to find out about Messiah ben Joseph, a couple of hundred years ago. For if they asked the rabbis, “Where did your dying Galilean Messiah ben Joseph come from?” then the rabbis couldn’t answer that. Because, if they said, “We always believed in him. He’s in the Bible,” then Christians would say, “Then why did you reject Jesus?” But if they said, “We made him up after the time of Jesus,” then Christians would say, “Why did you make up another Messiah just like the one you rejected?”

So they always preferred to keep Messiah ben Joseph as strictly classified information. That’s why I call him rabbinic Judaism’s best kept secret. And the rabbis managed to convince most of the world that they did not believe in a dying Messiah. They managed to convince many Christian theologians who simply did not know enough about rabbinic literature. And they all told us that “Jews don’t believe in a dying Messiah.” But none of that was really true. The rabbinic scriptures clearly teach about a dying Messiah. Jewish rabbis have always believed in a dying Messiah.

3. So did the rabbis believe in two Messiahs?

Yes. Actually, if we go back before the talmudic period, to the time of Jesus, and before, we find that some Israelites expected three or four Messiahs: Messiah ben David, Messiah ben Joseph, a Priest Messiah and sometimes a prophet too.

Many of these traditions predate the rabbinic era, going back at least as far as the second century BC and the Dead Sea Scrolls text called 4QTestimonia and the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs.

4. So are you saying that there is a Messiah from Aaron too?

There are several Bible texts which point to a prophet-priest Messiah. The first is Deuteronomy 18 where the Holy One says to Moses: I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brethren, and I will put my words in his mouth. He will tell them everything I command him. I myself will call to account anyone who does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name.

Another passage is 1 Sam 2.35, where the Holy One says: I will raise up for myself a faithful priest, who shall do according to what is in my heart and in my mind. And I will build him a sure house, and he shall go in and out before my mashiaḥ forever.

Yet another passage is Zechariah 3: Listen, Joshua the high priest, you and your companions who sit before you, for they are men who are a sign.

From these passages arose the idea that there would be a priest or prophet Messiah (or both) to accompany the other Messiah or Messiahs. We meet this figure quite frequently in the Dead Sea Scrolls, in the Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, in the early targum to Exodus 40, and in some early rabbinic traditions.

Sometimes the Priest Messiah is not a levitical priest, but instead he is the mysterious kohen Melchizedek who met Avram after his battle with the kings of the east. Sometimes the Priest and Prophet Messiah are distinct and sometimes they merge together, often as Elijah. However, after the destruction of the temple, the priest Messiah becomes less prominent in Israelite thought.

5. How does Messiah son of Joseph differ from the better-known Messiah son of David.

There are several differences. First, whereas Messiah son of David comes from the seed of David, Messiah son of Joseph comes from the seed of Joseph. The second big difference is that Messiah son of Joseph dies, but Messiah son of David does not. The Messiah from David may suffer adversities, but he never dies. In fact, there is even a passage in the Babylonian Talmud, in Sukkah 52b, where Messiah ben David sees that Messiah ben Joseph is slain, and he begs the Holy One that he may not suffer the same fate, but that he may live, and the Holy One assures him that he has been promised life for ever.

6. Does rabbinic Judaism still teach about Messiah ben Joseph today?

Rabbinic Judaism has consistently taught about Messiah ben Joseph from Roman times until today. He is found in the targums and the Baylonian Talmud and in scores of texts from the early first millennium. All of these are standard rabbinic texts which the rabbis teach to this day. Messiah ben Joseph is the main theme of Qol Ha-Tor, the “Voice of the Turtledove”, by the eighteenth century Polish rabbi, Hillel Rivlin of Shklov. As of this day, there are hundreds of Jewish websites that refer to Messiah ben Joseph.

7. You call him the greatest secret of rabbinic Judaism. Why is that?

Like I said, Jews were not at all keen that Christians should know about Messiah son of Joseph. At the Barcelona Disputation, Pablo Cristiani, a Jewish Christian friar, pressed Ramban – Rabbi Moshe ben Naḥman – to admit that the Messiah must die. Ramban replied, truly enough, that there is nowhere in all the writings of the sages where Messiah ben David dies. But he didn’t tell Friar Pablo about Messiah son of Joseph, although Ramban himself knew all about Messiah ben Joseph, and wrote about him.

It’s like Professor Robert Gordon says, in his introduction to my book, “Christian scholars were often ignorant about Messiah son of Joseph, and their Jewish counterparts were in no hurry to enlighten them about his existence or his possible significance for their disputations.”

One can understand why the rabbis preferred to keep Messiah son of Joseph confidential. After all, for thousands of years they had been telling everyone – Christians, but also their own Jewish people – that the Messiah does not die. So they really didn’t want anyone to know that their own holy texts speak of a Messiah who does die.

8. How did you find out about this “mysterious Messiah”?

I first met Messiah son of Joseph thirty years ago, when I was researching the book that would become The Message of the Psalter. I was puzzling over the allusions to Joseph in the midst of the Book of Psalms. Then I came upon Sa‘adya Gaon’s account of how Messiah son of Joseph would appear in the last days and die before Messiah son of David came. I had never heard about this Messiah, but I felt he might be the answer to my puzzle. Yet, as I explored the subject, I found everyone saying that Messiah son of Joseph arose in the Christian period. To me, this seemed odd. Why would the Rabbis reject one slain Messiah and invent another one just the same? So I decided that the matter needed further investigation. And so, over the years, I studied son of Joseph, translated the texts, gathered the evidence, wrote articles, and spoke on the subject. Then I gathered it all together systematically in the book, Messiah ben Joseph.

9. What are some of the scholarly views on the origins of this mysterious messiah ?

There are several views. They all tend to date the origin of Messiah ben Joseph after the time of Jesus.

Gustav Dalman, in the nineteenth century, thought that Ben Joseph arose as the result of an inner tension in Jewish thought between the sufferings of the Messiah (as in Isaiah 53) and his triumph. He said the rabbinic sages made him up in order to reconcile this apparent contradiction. So they gave the sufferings to one Messiah, Messiah ben Joseph, and the triumph to another, to Messiah ben David.

The Italian rabbi David Castelli thought it was a gesture of goodwill to the remains of the Ephraimites. They deserved a Messiah too, just like the Judahites. But it had to be a less important Messiah, one that dies to make way for Messiah ben David.

Others have preferred to see Ben Joseph as a legend arising from some suffering historical figure. Adolf Jellinek thought it was Josephus, when he surrendered to the Romans. Moses Buttenwieser said it was Alexander the Great. And David Baron thought it was a rabbinic memory of the life of Jesus. But the most popular view by far was that Messiah son of Joseph reflected the death of the messianic pretender Shimon bar Kokhba in AD 135. This was put forth by Michael Hamburger and Alfred Edersheim in the nineteenth century, and has been held by many others since. And there have been other minority views, some seeing him as a Samaritan belief.

Of course, this was a particular problem for the rabbis, like Jellinek, Buttenwieser, and Hamburger. If they said, “We believed in a dying Galilean Messiah before Jesus appeared,” then Christians would say, “Then why did you not believe in Jesus?” But if they said, “We invented our dying Galilean Messiah after the time of Jesus,” then Christians would say, “Why did you invent a Messiah like the one you rejected?” So they were stuck. They tried to keep the subject secret.

10. Do you agree with these views on dating?

No, I don’t I agree with these views. I believe Messiah son of Joseph is taught in the scriptures. Just as Jacob promised a Messiah to Judah, so he also promised a Messiah to Joseph. Moses too promises a Messiah to Joseph (although he says nothing about the Judahite Messiah). And there are references to the Josephite Messiah also in the Prophets and the Writings.

11. Where does Messiah son of Joseph first appear in the Bible?

Messiah ben Joseph first appears in the Torah in the two blessings of Joseph. The first blessing is by Jacob and the second by Moses.

He first appears in Jacob’s blessing in Genesis 49. After Jacob promises a hero to Judah in verse 10, he also promises a saviour to his beloved Joseph in v. 24. Joseph’s blessing is a big blessing, by far the longest of all Jacob’s blessings on his sons. And he recounts Joseph’s sufferings at the hands of his enemies. He says Joseph’s sufferings at the hands of his brothers were like being pierced by arrows. But Jacob says that Joseph overcame and triumphed by the power of Shaddai. And then he says that from thence, that is, from Shaddai, will come forth for Joseph a Shepherd-Rock of Israel. Mi-sham ro‘eh eben israel.

Now we there is an old Hebrew interpretational rule which says, Ma‘aseh avot siman la-banim, That is, “The deeds of the fathers are a sign for the sons.” Or, as Ramban says: “Everything that befell the Patriarchs is a portent for their descendants.” (On Gen. 12:6; cf. Midr. Tan. Lekh lekha §9). So, just as Joseph suffered before triumphing, so this hero promised to Joseph must take the same route to victory.

Also, the words Shepherd-Rock are important. The Rock, in particular, is the name of the God of Israel. Ramban has a lot of interesting things to say on this in his commentary on the Rock in Deut 32.4. Of course, the Shepherd is a divine title too. This Shepherd-Rock coming from Shaddai is no ordinary man. That’s all in his first appearance in Genesis 49.

Yet I would argue that his second appearance in the Torah is even more significant. In Deut. 33.17, Moses is deliberately building on the blessing of Jacob. He alludes to Jacob’s words several times. Just like Jacob gives Joseph six blessings, Moses gives him six treasures.

And he says His first born ox is his glory and the horns of a re’em are his horns. Bekhor shoro hadar lo, v-qarnei re‘em qarnav. Now many translations miss it, but the shor and the re‘em are two totally different kinds of ox. The shor is the domestic ox, bos taurus. He is born to humble servitude and captivity. And since he is a firstborn ox, he is born to sacrifice. That was the inevitable destiny of a firstborn ox in Israel. But the re‘em is a totally different ox. This was the aurochs. The aurochs is now extinct, but it was a fearsome beast. Julius Caesar saw it in the Black Forest and said that it was almost as big as an elephant. It was two metres high to the shoulders, and three metres to the tips of its horns. He adds that it hated the sight of mankind. We find the same thing in Job. The Holy One says Will the aurochs serve you? Will he stay by your manger at night? Will he plough the ground for you? (Job 39.9–12). So the aurochs was very fierce. Nobody went near an aurochs or, to give it its Hebrew name, a re‘em.

So we have two kinds of oxen: a shor and a re‘em. The shor is a slave, the re‘em is a king. The shor is a captive, the re’em is free. The shor is destined to sacrifice, the re’em is destined to life, for it could not be offered in Israel’s sacrifical system. Now Moses’s prophecy says that the one promised to Joseph will first be like a shor and then he will have the great horns of a re’em. That means he will be sacrificed like a shor, before he triumphs and takes the crown of the all-conquering re’em.

If we ask who this son of Joseph is, the rabbis have two answers: Joshua or Messiah ben Joseph. But it can’t be Joshua. For this promised one will conquer all the nations to the ends of the earth, but Joshua only conquered the seven nations of Canaan. And so it must be another Joshua, a second Joshua, who will conquer all the nations of the earth.

Of course, for us to understand this, we have to be aware of the difference between a shor and a re’em. For those who first heard Moses, this was basic knowledge, just like a horse is not a zebra. But nowadays, it’s a distinction that is not widely known. And translators have not always helped.

In fact, to be honest, I’d say that these two great blessings on Joseph, in Genesis 49 and Deuteronomy 33, say more about the Messiah from Joseph than about the Messiah from Judah. But the two Messiahs are alike in this: just as the Messiah prophesied to Judah is like David, but even greater, so the Messiah promised to Joseph is like Joshua, but even greater. He will conquer not only the Promised Land, but the whole world.

12. You say Messiah son of Joseph is in the prophets and Psalms. Where is that?

Yes. Messiah ben Joseph is spoken of all through the Hebrew Bible, the Tanakh. The most obvious passage in the Prophets is the suffering shepherd-king in Zechariah 12. Like Joseph, he is betrayed to death by Judah. Like Joseph, he is sold for pieces of silver. Like Joseph, he is mourned as a slain firstborn. Like Joseph, he is pierced-through and given over to death. In fact, he shares characteristics both of the house of Joseph and of David, like a second Joseph and a second Josiah.

Isaiah too speaks of a coming royal figure who will endure suffering and death as an atonement for many, and then triumph. But what many do not realize is that this figure is robed in Josephite imagery. He is, like Joseph, a fruitful vine springing from dry ground.

There are also allusions to him among the resurgent tribes of Joseph spoken of by Obadiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. Habakkuk calls Joshua the Messiah of the Lord, who made the sun stand still. And he looks for a second such Joshua to appear.

Micah’s ruler who is to be born in Bethlehem is called a brother of the Josephites, not of the Judahites. (Remember, Bethlehem was Rachel’s town long before it was David’s. There her prayer was answered to have a son to succeed Joseph.) Micah’s ruler will restore the “former dominion” to Israel—that is, Joseph’s dominion—and the authority of the house of David will come to him.

In the Psalms, the clearest passages are Psalm 1, whose righteous king is like a second Joshua (meditating on the law day and night) and like a second Joseph, who prospers in all he does. This Joshua-Joseph figure is juxtaposed with the second David messiah of Psalm 2.

Then there is Psalm 92, whose Messiah is like Joseph’s flourishing green plant, and like the aurochs with exalted horns, spoken of by Moses. And he is anointed with fresh oil. This is a Josephite Messiah. But he also appears in other psalms as well.

13. Is there evidence for the Josephite messiah in the Dead Sea Scrolls?

Yes, I discuss this in chapter 6 of the book. There are two texts in particular. One is called 4QTestimonia which dates from before 100 BC. It presents four anticipated redeemer figures: a prophet like Moses, a king, a priest, and a Joshua hero, a son of Joseph.

Another text, is the Joseph Apocryphon 4Q372 which dates from before 200 BC. It presents one who is actually called “Joseph” by name. Like Zechariah’s pierced king, he will suffer in the context of a future attack on Jerusalem. Then, in his death throes, he cries out to God his father, in psalms, to deliver him, and predict his rising again in glory.

I also refer to several other Dead Sea texts and inscriptions from this period which may refer to Ben Joseph.

14. Is the Josephite messiah found in other Second Temple Period Jewish literature?

Yes. I propose that he is in the two oxen of 1 Enoch 90.37-38, who point straight back to Joseph’s two oxen of Deut 33:17. I suggest that we also find him in the Testament of Naphtali, the Testament of Benjamin, the Sibylline Oracles, the Apocalypse of Ezra, Joseph and Aseneth, and the book of Jesus ben Siraḥ. But all that would take a lot of explaining. But you’ll find it all in chapter 5 of Messiah ben Joseph.

15. When does Messiah ben Joseph first appear in rabbinic literature?

The earliest rabbinic reference to Messiah ben Joseph by name are the targums, if we can call them rabbinic literature. I argue that the Codex Reuchlinianus Tosefta to Zechariah 12 is certainly pre-Christian in origin. It speaks of Meshiha bar Yosef being slain by Gog at the gate of Jerusalem.

The reference to him in the Talmud Bavli, in Sukkah 52, is certainly rabbinic. It is also early. It records a rabbinic discussion about Messiah ben Joseph at the time when the temple was still standing. The subject again is Zechariah and the mourning there. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says the mourning is for slain Messiah ben Joseph. But others disagree. But they all refer to Ben Joseph as a figure perfectly familiar to them all.

16. What is the purpose/objective of this figure (i.e., what was the need that birthed the idea)?

If, as I suggest, the figure is implied in the prophecies of Jacob and by Moses, in the same way that they foretold the Messiah from Judah, then the answer is that purpose of Messiah ben Joseph is ultimately the same as that of the Messiah from David, that is, he is part of the divine plan to free Adam’s children from the power of the serpent.

17. What is the connection between the son of Joseph and the son of David?

In rabbinic literature, they both play an important part in the final redemption. Messiah ben Joseph always comes first, as it is said, ‘he [Joseph] came first in Egypt and he will come first in the age to come’ (Sifrê on Deut. 33.16, §353; Yalk. on Deut. 33.16, §959.) He comes to prepare the way for Ben David. And it is implied that his death plays a part in this. In fact, it is said If they are not pure, Messiah ben Ephraim will come; and if they are pure, Messiah ben David will come. (Nistarot R Shimon b Yoḥai; 7th century)[1] So his death is connected with the purification of the Israelites. Ultimately, Messiah ben Joseph will be raised to life again. Then he and Ben David will lead Israel like Aaron and Moses (Tg on Song of Songs 4 &7).

18. How would you use the Messiah son of Joseph as a way to share the gospel with the Jewish people?

That would depend on whether we are talking about Messiah ben Joseph in the Bible or in the rabbinic sages.

If we are talking about MbJ in the Bible, then it is part of the testimony to the sufferings of the Messiah. Christian testimony on this matter relies heavily on Isaiah 53. But I would suggest that Deuteronomy 33.17 is just as important. In fact, I think the blessings on Joseph are the real foundation of Isaiah 53, and that Isaiah is presenting the Messiah as a second Joseph. So on Deut. 33:16–17, I’d say that the rabbis say that this passage foretells a Messiah, and see if they agree with that. Then I would ask what it means that the Messiah is a b’khor shor, that is, a first born ox. I think Zech. 12 is also important. There the Messiah is pierced and mourned as a firstborn son, but his death opens a healing fountain to the Israelites.

BUT if we are talking about Messiah ben Joseph in the writings of the rabbinic sages, then I will see how much they know about the rabbinic figure. Do they know that he dies and rises again? Do they know that he comes from Galilee and dies at the gate of Jerusalem? Do they understand that his death is an atonement? Do they understand that, following his death, Israel will be scattered? Of course, that will require having quite a lot of texts at one’s fingertips. But, if one can demonstrate these things, then one can ask, “Who does this look like?”

But I think the main thing is that Deut 33:17 points to a Messiah from the territory of Joseph who dies as a sacrifice and then triumphs.

19. How do you think the idea of Messiah son of Joseph is relevant for Christians?

I think, for a start, it is crucial to every aspect of Jewish-Christian relations. Professor Martha Himmelfarb said about my book on Messiah ben Joseph, “If Mitchell were correct, the implications for both ancient Jewish and early Christian messianism would be profound.” I agree with her totally. If Messiah ben Joseph is implicit in the Pentateuch, as the rabbis say he is, then the implications are truly profound. Clearly, many of them did believe that a Messiah from Joseph was to suffer and die before rising to glory. But they were not willing to identify this with Jesus.

But this idea is also important for the faith of the ordinary Christians. I’d been reading the Bible for years before I discovered and investigated Messiah ben Joseph. For me it was a complete revelation. I feel like I didn’t even begin to understand messianic prophecy until I understood this. And when I did see it – the prophecy of a Galilean Messiah who would die for the sins of the world – it became a rock for my faith. How could Jacob and Moses have foretold this, if not by the power of God? And who could it finally point to except Jesus of Nazareth?

20. Do you think the literary parallels between David and Joseph are important for a discussion of the Messiah son of Joseph?

By literary parallels we mean the resemblances between the two Bible figures. In many ways, they are quite similar. Both are rejected. Both are close to death. Both rise to rule. So the question is why one messianic paradigm, for Jacob and for Moses, represents sacrificial death and the other does not. I think it’s true that Joseph’s near-death existence is more severe than David’s. Joseph is thrown into a pit, and is sold as a slave and ends up in a dungeon. He seems to spend years of his life under ground in a virtual death-like state. David does not. Also Joseph’s exile from the land of Israel and from his people is more severe and prolonged than David’s. David gets a mini-exile in Gath, but remains in touch with the Israelites. But Joseph is completely gone. No one knows where he is or can contact him. Everyone, including his father, thinks he’s dead.

There is also the added question of how these parallels impinge on the tribes of each patriarch. The tribes of Joseph go in to what seems like an everlasting exile. But, says Jacob, his seed will fill the nations (Gen. 48). And he will be revealed in the last days. But David’s offspring, on the other hand, go in to a relatively short exile and are then regathered to the Holy Land.

Of course, their paths are not simply parallel. They are sometimes in conflict. It is the House of David and Jerusalemites who pierce Zechariah’s Josephite Shepherd-King, and gaze upon him (12:10).

21. Has the idea of Messiah son of Joseph undergone any developments and/or changes over the years?

You know, I wonder. I used to think that some ideas were later than others. For instance, I used to think that Ben Joseph’s resurrection is a later idea. We first meet it explicitly in the apocalyptic midrashim. But then again, it is implied in Deut 33:17. Likewise, the idea that he dies at the gate of Jerusalem appears explicitly only in later midrashim. But, again, it is implied in Zech. 12 and it appears in the Dead Sea text called the Joseph Apocryphon (4Q372). So these days I’m more of the opinion that even ideas that seem later are all implied in the biblical texts. 

22. Do you see any hints in the New Testament of the Messiah son of Joseph?

Yes I think so. Remember, Messiah ben Joseph is to be a second Joshua or Yeshua who will die for the sins of the world. And in Jesus of Nazareth we meet one called Yeshua ben Yosef who does die for the sins of the world. I suggest that two New Testament writers in particular—John the Apostle and Stephen the Martyr—saw him in just these terms.

In John’s gospel, we begin with Philip’s testimony. He confesses that ‘the one spoken of by Moses and the prophets’ is ‘Jesus (Joshua) ben Joseph of Nazareth’, who is the ‘son of God’ and ‘the King of Israel’ (1.45–49). We know, from the discussion in B. Suk 52, that Messiah ben Joseph was already a term perfectly familiar to Rabbi Dosa and his contemporaries in the middle of the first century. So I don’t doubt that John (and perhaps Philip too) was alluding to the same figure the rabbis also knew. Later in the gospel, the crowds say “Is this not Yeshua ben Yoseph, whose father and mother we know. How can he now say: I came down from heaven?” (6:42)

Another allusion I think is in the woman at the well. In the Bible, the well or fount is a symbol for genealogical descent (Prov. 5.15–18). It follows that this well, at the heart of the Samaritan community, represents, for John, the Samaritans’ descent from Jacob and Joseph. Indeed, we might say that the well, where the Samaritans go for life-sustaining water, represents their hope in one particular descendant of Jacob and Joseph, that is, the Taheb, the Messiah promised to Joseph. Jesus claims to be this Messiah, who will offer living water giving eternal life.

I think Jesus’s description of himself as the true vine is another Josephite allusion. People often interpret the vine in John 15 as representing the true Israel. But there is little evidence that the vine represents Israel as a whole. It is more correct to say that it represents Joseph. Jesus is saying he is the true Joseph.

Finally, John is the only New Testament writer who alludes to Zechariah’s pierced Shepherd-King. This he does at the cross, citing Zechariah 12.10 (Jn 19.37): They will look upon me whom they have pierced. This is a text which both the targum and the Talmud associate with Ben Joseph. The only other place it is cited in the New Testament is in John’s Revelation. (Rev. 1:7).

There are other passages in John which point in the same direction. And I also think Stephen alludes to Joseph as a messianic type (like Moses) in Acts 7. Justin Martyr also seems aware of many of the texts which rabbinic literature associates with Ben Joseph. And Justin speaks frequently of how these point to a second Joshua, like Yeshua-Jesus. Of course, the Church Fathers were not expecting several messiahs, as the rabbis were. The Fathers believed in one Messiah, in Jesus, who had already come. But a great many of them see Joseph as a typological picture of the Messiah Jesus.

23. How does this material affect the common scholarly notion that the Hebrew Bible and Judaism doesn’t teach a dying and rising messiah?

I think it affects it enormously. The common scholarly view is wrong. Judaism does teach a dying Messiah. It is as clear as day. In the Targums and Talmud; in the homiletic and exegetic midrashim; in the apocalyptic midrashim and the geonic responsa; in the hekhalot literature and the Zohar; in the rishonim and the aḥaronim. No one can deny it. He is there. Go and read the texts. He features in Jewish literature of every genre and period, in documents written by Jews for Jews, passed down from generation to generation in Hebrew, Aramaic, Arabic, and Persian.

So the issue is not about whether rabbinic Judaism believes in a dying Messiah. The question is when did they start believing in a dying Messiah. For that, read my book. I argue that the reference to the death of Messiah ben Joseph in the Targum Tosefta to Zech 12:10 must date from before the Christian period. That is the reason why the tosefta passage was removed from the standard targum. And I show that the discussion of Messiah ben Joseph in Bavli Suk 52a shows that the figure was known to Rabbi Dosa in his youth, that is, in the early first century of our era, in the time of Jesus. And I argue that the 3rd-century BC Dead Sea text called The Joseph Apocryphon speaks about Messiah ben Joseph. So this is not a late idea at all. It predates Christian times.

Of course, I say it is from the Bible. And if someone wants to assert that the Bible has no dying Messiah, then I must say “Where did the rabbis get it from?” Why do they hang on to this idea which is so contradictory to their stated beliefs about the Messiah if they think it is not authoritative. And, if he is not from the Bible, why do the rabbis always refer to him with biblical proof-texts. For me there is no question at all that passages like Isaiah 53 and Zechariah 12, and, yes, Deuteronomy 33, refer to the death of a righteous eschatological anointed king. And that is a dying Messiah.

One of the main features of recent Jewish-Christian dialogue is how both sides are now seeing how much they actually have in common. Professor Boyarin is willing to admit that, long before the time of Jesus, Jews believed that the Godhead was plural rather than singular, that one member of the Godhead might appear as a heavenly Messiah, and that there were even some Jews who thought that Isaiah’s suffering servant-king spoke of the Messiah. Yet despite all this, Boyarin is quite opposed to my views on the biblical origins of Messiah ben Joseph. But really the only point of disagreement between us now is really the name of this figure. He is to be a second Joshua or Yeshua ben Joseph. I wonder why he finds this so difficult to accept.

Professor Himmelfarb has said: “If Mitchell were correct, the implications for both ancient Jewish and early Christian messianism would be profound.” She would, I think, prefer it if I were not correct. But I agree with her. If I am correct, the implications are truly profound. It will overturn how Jews and Christians read the Bible.

24. Now that Messiah ben Joseph is becoming better known, how are Jewish commentators responding to it.

There are now several characteristic Jewish responses when we point out that the rabbis always believed in a dying Joshua Messiah.

The first is to minimize Messiah ben Joseph. Chaim Blumenthal says that Messiah ben Joseph arose from Obadiah 19–21 which says Joseph will be a flame, and saviours will go up on Mount Zion to rule the mountains of Esau. And this, he says, is the “clearest” verse about Messiah ben Joseph. And he also speaks of Zech. 12 which he thinks is less clear. So perhaps he hasn’t quite thought through Deuteronomy 33:17. And I think there’s a lot more to Zechariah 12 than he is willing to see.

Another approach is to say that, yes, Messiah ben Joseph dies, but his death is never atoning. Historically, quite a few Christian commentators have taken this line too. But this is also the line taken now by Tovia Singer. He says “Messiah ben Joseph will not atone for sins. No one can die for the sins of another. There is no vicarious atonement. It’s just that the death of one person can lead to another’s repentance when they see the inevitability of death.” But to say that Messiah ben Joseph’s death is never atoning is simply not true. Many Bible passages speak of his death as an atonement. If he is a firstborn ox (Deut. 33:17), then he is certainly a sacrifice of atonement. The firstborn ox died vicariously in the place of the firstborn son. The death of Zechariah’s Joseph-like Shepherd-King opens a fountain to the house of David and the Jerusalemites to cleanse them from sin and impurity. In rabbinic literature, in the 37th chapter of Pesikta Rabbati, the patriarchs say to Messiah ben Joseph, “Ephraim Messiah Tsidqenu, although we are your fathers, yet you are greater than we, for you bore sins on our behalf and awful sufferings, by means of which the earliest and latest [generations] are atoned for.” And there is the dictum that we find in several of the midrashim, which says “If they are not pure, Messiah ben Ephraim will come; and if they are pure, Messiah ben David will come.” In other words, Messiah ben Joseph’s coming is linked to Israel’s impurity. In fact, there is a lot of evidence that the death of Messiah ben Joseph provides atonement. I published a paper on this in the Review of Rabbinic Judaism in 1997.

Another approach that Singer takes is simply to minimize the importance of the Messiah altogether. He says mashiaḥ means an anointed one or a leader. But Messiah is just a leader. Messiah ben David or Messiah ben Joseph will not cure all the problems. They are just individual leaders. But Israel also has a messianic anointing from the Holy One.

And the final objection is to say that Messiah son of Joseph and Messiah son of David cannot both point to Jesus, for they are different people. They have to be different people, for they are descended from different patriarchs.

To this I would reply, yes, they are descended from different patriarchs. So they cannot be patrilineally-descended from the same person. But when we talk about Jesus, we do not believe that the Son of God was patrilineally descended from any human father. Yet it is possible that he was descended from David, and from Joseph, and from Aaron on his mother’s side.

On this subject, it is important to note that, in the sixth century, many midrashic writers were ready to recognize the exilarch Nehemiah ben Hushiel as Messiah ben Joseph. He was a descendant of David, but he also had Josephite blood from Ahab. And later there were those who clamied that the Arizal was Messiah ben Joseph in his generation.

25. So do you think that Jesus is descended both from David and from Joseph.

I discuss this subject fully in my follow-up book, Jesus: The Incarnation of the Word. The New Testament, of course, teaches that Jesus was begotten in Virgin Mariam by the Holy Spirit. That means, like I said, that he does not descend patrilineally from any of the patriarchs. However, he does descend from David and Joseph and Aaron through his mother.

Mariam’s father, Joakim, was a descendant of David, as we read in the Protoevangelium of James. The New Testament is clear about this too. Matthew traces the line of royal succession from Solomon and Luke traces the line of genetic descent from Nathan, to bypass the curses on Josiah’s sons.

But Mariam’s mother, Anna (Hannah), was descended from high-priestly stock. The Talmud tells us that her ancestors included seganim, that is adjutant high-priests in the temple. There are also good hints that she was of Maccabean descent. So, thru his mother he received both Davidic and Aaronite blood.

But from her he also received descent from Joseph, as follows. Omri king of Ephraim, from the house of Joseph, begat Ahab. Ahab begat Athaliah who married Jehoram of the house of David. Through their son, Ahaziah, the seed of Omri entered the Solomonic lineage of David. This continued through ten genera­tions to Josiah. Then it passed through Josiah’s daughter Tamar to Shealtiel and Pedaiah, whom Tamar bore to Neri. Then Pedaiah (in the name of Shealtiel) begat Zerubbabel who begat Rhesa. From Rhesa, the seed of Omri descended fifteen generations to Levi, and thence to Panther, Joakim, and Mariam.

That was his blood descent. But Ephraimite royal status passed by the same route to Zerubbabel, then to Abiud and Rhesa, and converged in Joseph, begotten by Jacob, according to the law of levir, for his brother Heli. And he received the royal title to David’s throne from Joseph of Nazareth who was the foremost claimant to David’s throne in his day.

26.Do you believe that Jesus is Messiah son of Joseph?

That’s a question I get asked a lot. It’s a bit like asking whether I think that Jesus is Messiah ben David. So if you were to ask me, “Do I think that Genesis 49.10 foretells a Messiah from the tribe of Judah?” I would say, “Yes.” It doesn’t give a lot of information about him. But it speaks of a hero promised to Judah whom all the nations will obey. And ultimately that points to Jesus.

But if you were to ask me, “Do I think that Messiah ben David of rabbinic literature is Jesus?” then I would have to say “No.” For the rabbinic Messiah ben David is one who comes to make non-Jews into servants of the Jews, or cast them into Gehenna. But Jesus says that “Many will come from the east and the west to sit at the banquet with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the kingdom of heaven. But the sons of the kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.” So the rabbinic Messiah ben David is not the same as Jesus.

In the same way, if you say “Do Moses and Habakkuk and Zechariah foretell a second Joshua Messiah who will die as a sacrifice of atonement and rise again?” I will say “Yes.” But, if you ask “Is the rabbinic Messiah ben Joseph the same as Jesus,” then the answer has to be “Not exactly.” After all, the rabbinic Messiah son of Joseph will die in battle for Jerusalem, and Jesus did not literally do that. And the rabbinic Messiah son of Joseph will rule with Messiah son of David. But, as I see it, all the messianic paradigms are fulfilled in the one man.

---

[1] ‘R. Alexandri said: R. Joshua (b. Levi) opposed two verses:…If they are pure, [Messiah will come] on the clouds of heaven (Dan. 7.13); if not, [he will come] afflicted and riding upon an ass (Zech. 9:9).’ B. Sanh. 98a; cf. Y. Taan 1.1 (63d).