Messiah ben Joseph: Exploring Messiah Expectations and the Perception of Jesus' First Coming
Introduction
“There is, in rabbinic literature, a figure called Messiah ben Jospeh. This Messiah 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, as we shall see, confounds Satan, atones for sin, and abolishes death itself. And then he is raised to life again.” (Messiah ben Joseph by Dr. David Mitchell)
In his book, “Messiah ben Joseph,” David C. Mitchell provides an extensive exploration of the figure known as Messiah ben Joseph in Jewish literature and its various interpretations and implications. For a more detailed look at this topic, I would encourage you to read the review I did of the book found by clicking here.
Through his research of the Psalms, Mitchell concluded that the sequence of the Psalms was intentional, tracing a narrative of redemption. Notably, the names in the Psalms revealed a significant pattern: David's name was prominent at the beginning and end, but from Psalms 60 to 108, the central figure was Joseph. Why would Joseph get this major section in the center of the psalms of David, which speak of the coming of David’s son, the Messiah? This puzzled Dr. Mitchell because the Psalms primarily discuss the coming of David's son, the Messiah.
Mitchell later discovered a book by a 10th-century Babylonian Rabbi named Sagan in the Edinburgh University library that revealed a Messiah from the tribe of Joseph must precede the Messiah from David, dying to prepare the way. Dr. Mitchell had never heard of the idea of a Messiah from the tribe of Joseph. Dr. Mitchell believed if a Messiah from Joseph must appear before the Messiah from David, that would explain why there is so much about him in the middle of the Psalms.
The Name Messiah ben Jospeh
The title "Messiah, son of Joseph" or "Messiah, son of Ephraim" refers to a specific messianic figure in Jewish tradition known as Messiah ben Joseph (Messiah son of Joseph). This figure is distinct from Messiah ben David, who comes from the line of King David. The reason this messiah is sometimes called the "son of Ephraim" is because Ephraim was one of the two sons of Joseph, and Jewish tradition often connects Joseph's lineage to this messianic role.
In this context, the Messiah from Joseph (or Ephraim) is seen as a figure who, like Joshua—who was also a descendant of Joseph—will act as a savior and deliverer. Joshua, who led the Israelites into the Promised Land after Moses, was from the tribe of Ephraim, making him a descendant of Joseph. Just as Joshua was a significant leader and warrior for Israel, the Messiah ben Joseph is expected to be a great leader in a similar vein, often associated with battles and the initial stages of redemption.
This messiah is sometimes called the "second Joshua" because, just as Joshua led Israel into physical victory, Messiah ben Joseph is expected to lead in a significant and redemptive battle before the final, ultimate messianic role of Messiah ben David comes to fruition. In other words, just as the Messiah ben David is a greater figure than King David, Messiah ben Joseph is seen as a greater figure than Joshua, fulfilling a similar but elevated role in the redemption narrative.
Thus, calling him Messiah, son of Ephraim or Messiah, son of Joseph highlights his lineage and connects him to the legacy of Joseph and his descendant Joshua, both of whom played crucial roles in Israel’s history.
Bottom Line Up Front - Jesus is Messiah ben Jospeh
It has long been argued that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of David, and that this expectation forms the core of hope in the New Testament. However, both the Bible and numerous other sources suggest the existence of another promised figure: the Messiah, son of Joseph, who is destined to die an atoning death. In Jewish tradition, this figure is known as Messiah ben Joseph—a suffering, dying Messiah whose role is essential within their messianic expectations.
Did the Idea of Messiah ben Jospeh Develop Before Jesus or Afterwards?
Many people have assumed or thought that the idea of Messiah ben Joseph was a post-Christian (second century) rabbinic response or reaction to the Christian claims of Jesus being the Messiah. But this concept made little sense to Dr. Mitchell. Why would rabbis reject Jesus, only to invent another Messiah that looks identical to him?Based on his research, he believes that the concept of Messiah, son of Joseph is something that predates Jesus and is in the Bible. Mitchell has said that Messiah ben Joseph is Judaism’s best kept secret.
In fact, the rabbis have always tried to keep him somewhat secret from the Christians. During the Barcelona Disputation (1263 CE), the Jewish scholar Ramban (Nachmanides) was challenged by the Jewish Christian convert Pablo Christiani to admit that the Messiah must die. Pablo Christiani argued that Jewish texts supported Christian claims about the Messiah, including the idea that the Messiah must suffer and die. Ramban defended Judaism, emphasizing that Jewish tradition did not explicitly support the Christian concept of a suffering and dying Messiah.
Ramban, aware of the concept of Messiah ben Joseph, chose not to share his knowledge because he sensed that Christiani was unaware of this idea. He avoided the question by stating that no Jewish literature explicitly mentions that the Messiah ben David will die, thereby keeping the knowledge of Messiah ben Joseph hidden.
The rabbis needed to keep this idea secret because, if Christians knew about it, they could question why Jews did not accept Jesus, who Christians believe fits the description of a Messiah who dies for the sins of Israel and rises again. The notion of a Messiah from Joseph's lineage who must come and die could potentially support Christian claims if it was widely acknowledged.
“If this idea of Messiah ben Joseph arose before Jesus, then it poses the question, why did Judaism not accept him when he came? If the idea of Messiah ben Joseph arose after the time of Jesus, then why did Judaism create another Messiah that looks exactly like the Messiah they rejected?”
The Evolution and Development of Messiah ben Joseph in the Jewish Literature
This messianic figure, although not as well-known as Messiah ben David, plays a significant role in numerous Jewish texts and traditions, spanning different genres and historical periods. The Messiah ben Joseph is depicted as a suffering messiah who is destined to die, and his death is seen as a catalyst for Israel's redemption and the ultimate arrival of Messiah ben David.
Mitchell’s book traces the origins and evolution of the Messiah ben Joseph concept through various lenses: old rabbinic views, Christian interpretations, and modern scholarship. In rabbinic literature, this figure is prominently featured in texts such as the Talmud, midrashim, and the Zohar, often associated with passages in the Torah and the Prophets.
In these documents, Messiah ben Joseph always appears before his better-known comrade, Messiah ben David. Nevertheless, Messiah ben Joseph is no minor figure. On the contrary, as C.C. Torrey of Yale wrote many years ago:
The doctrine of The two Messiahs [i.e. ben David and ben Ephraim] holds an important place in Jewish Theology... It is not a theory imperfectly formulated or only temporarily held, but a standard article of faith, early and firmly established and universally accepted.'
The Talmud says Messiah ben David cannot come till Messiah ben Joseph appears. The Targum on the Song of Songs says Ben Joseph will rule with Ben David like Aaron with Moses. It is generally held that the full inauguration of the Messianic Age begins with the death of Messiah ben Joseph. And, to this day, observant Jews eagerly await his coming as the beginning of the redemption.
Yet, despite his importance, Messiah ben Joseph is little known and little studied. Views on Messiah ben Joseph's origins are many and much-debated. Christian scholarship was quite unaware of him till a couple of centuries ago. Indeed, the rabbis always preferred to keep him on a strictly need-to-know basis.
In the last two decades, there has been renewed interest in Messiah ben Joseph, with translations and analyses of various texts shedding new light on his role and origins. Scholars like Israel Knohl have proposed connections between Messiah ben Joseph and earlier messianic figures, suggesting deep roots in Jewish tradition that predate Christianity.
Judiasm and Types of Messiah’s
As we discussed in the lesson, "The Hope of Messiah," (click here if you have not completed yet) it's worth emphasizing once again. In Jewish tradition, the concept of the Messiah is much more diverse than the singular figure often associated with modern interpretations. The Hebrew Bible and other ancient Jewish texts suggest the possibility of multiple messiahs, each fulfilling different roles based on biblical promises and prophecies. This is particularly clear in the Dead Sea Scrolls and rabbinic literature, where several messianic figures are anticipated, each descending from a different patriarch or fulfilling specific divine functions.
At the core of this expectation is Messiah ben David, the ruler from the tribe of Judah. Genesis 49 speaks of the scepter not departing from Judah, pointing to the kingship that would emerge from David's line. This king is later promised to David and represents the primary expectation for the Jewish people. This messianic figure is understood to be the ultimate king who will rule with justice and bring peace, often depicted as a Davidic descendant who restores Israel.
However, alongside Messiah ben David is the less commonly discussed Messiah ben Joseph (also known as Messiah ben Ephraim), who is linked to the lineage of Joseph. This figure is believed to be a suffering servant, akin to the story of Joseph in Genesis, who endures hardship and betrayal but eventually rises to prominence. Zechariah prophesies about this messiah, who will be involved in the restoration of Israel and the defeat of its enemies.
In addition to the two main messianic figures, ancient Jewish texts like the 4QTestimonia from the Dead Sea Scrolls introduce other significant roles, including a prophet like Moses (from Deuteronomy 18) and a priestly messiah, descended from Levi (referenced in 1 Samuel 2:35). The priestly messiah is tasked with spiritual leadership, while the prophet serves as a bearer of divine guidance. In some traditions, these roles are merged into a single figure, while in others, they remain distinct. Additionally, Jewish literature sometimes presents the concept of a Joshua-like Messiah, closely tied to Messiah ben Joseph—a descendant of Joseph and a second Joseph figure representing suffering and leadership.
Rabbinic literature further expands on this idea, with several mentions of four messianic figures: Messiah ben David, Messiah ben Joseph, a prophet, and a priest. These figures represent different aspects of the Messiah’s mission—ruling, suffering, guiding, and offering spiritual leadership. Although these expectations vary across different texts, the presence of multiple messianic figures reflects a multifaceted understanding of salvation and restoration in Jewish thought.
While modern interpretations often focus on a single messianic figure, Jewish tradition holds expectations of multiple messiahs or messianic types, each playing distinct roles in God’s redemptive plan. These diverse expectations are rooted in promises found throughout the Hebrew Bible.
Can the concept of different messianic figures be unified into one? By the time of the prophet Zechariah, it seems that these separate messianic roles converge into a single figure. Even in the New Testament, there is evidence that during Jesus’ time, many were uncertain about how many messiahs were expected or from where they would emerge.
What we consistently see in Jewish literature are messianic archetypes. In theory, these roles could be fulfilled by different individuals. However, Christianity asserts that Jesus is the one and only Messiah, uniting these diverse expectations. Is there evidence in the Hebrew Bible that one person could embody multiple messianic roles? The clearest example comes from Zechariah, where he blends the traditions of Messiah ben David and Messiah ben Joseph into one figure.
How Can One Person Fulfill the Roles of Multiple Messianic Figures?
How can one person, like Jesus, be the promised descendant of Judah, David, Joseph, Aaron, and others? The most straightforward explanation is through paternal lineage, but descent through the maternal line is also a possibility. It would be impossible to trace all of these lineages solely through a father's line. However, through the mother’s lineage, this becomes more plausible. Jesus, miraculously incarnated by God, was born of Mary, who is a descendant of David, Joseph, and Aaron. How can this be? Since Jesus does not inherit the DNA or lineage of an earthly father, His ancestry is best traced through Mary.
Mary’s descent from David is the clearest connection, and the New Testament writers go to great lengths to demonstrate this, carefully recording genealogies to prove it. The best example for Mary’s lineage is Matthew 1 (see below).
Additionally, Mary’s relationship to Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron, highlights her connection to the priestly line. The genealogies in Matthew 1 and Luke 3 does not directly show evidence that Jesus is a descendant of Aaron, who comes from the tribe of Levi, as the genealogies focus on the tribe of Judah (through David). However, based on Luke 1:36, we know that Mary, Jesus’ mother, is a relative of Elizabeth, who is described as a descendant of Aaron. This connection implies that through Mary, Jesus could have a connection to the priestly line of Aaron, although it’s not explicitly listed in these genealogies.
There was a priest named Zachariah, of the division of Abijah; and he had a wife from the daughters of Aaron, and her name was Elizabeth". (Luke 1:5)
"And behold, even your relative Elizabeth herself has conceived a son in her old age". (Luke 1:36)
Let’s take a closer look at the genealogies presented in the New Testament. The genealogies of Jesus can be found in Matthew 1 and Luke 3. Here they are listed from the ESV:
The book of the genealogy of Jesus Christ, the son of David, the son of Abraham. Abraham was the father of Isaac, and Isaac the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Judah and his brothers, and Judah the father of Perez and Zerah by Tamar, and Perez the father of Hezron, and Hezron the father of Ram, and Ram the father of Amminadab, and Amminadab the father of Nahshon, and Nahshon the father of Salmon, and Salmon the father of Boaz by Rahab, and Boaz the father of Obed by Ruth, and Obed the father of Jesse, and Jesse the father of David the king. And David was the father of Solomon by the wife of Uriah, and Solomon the father of Rehoboam, and Rehoboam the father of Abijah, and Abijah the father of Asaph, and Asaph the father of Jehoshaphat, and Jehoshaphat the father of Joram, and Joram the father of Uzziah,nand Uzziah the father of Jotham, and Jotham the father of Ahaz, and Ahaz the father of Hezekiah, and Hezekiah the father of Manasseh, and Manasseh the father of Amos, and Amos the father of Josiah, and Josiah the father of Jechoniah and his brothers, at the time of the deportation to Babylon. And after the deportation to Babylon: Jechoniah was the father of Shealtiel, and Shealtiel the father of Zerubbabel, and Zerubbabel the father of Abiud, and Abiud the father of Eliakim, and Eliakim the father of Azor, and Azor the father of Zadok, and Zadok the father of Achim, and Achim the father of Eliud, and Eliud the father of Eleazar, and Eleazar the father of Matthan, and Matthan the father of Jacob, and Jacob the father of Joseph the husband of Mary, of whom Jesus was born, who is called Christ. So all the generations from Abraham to David were fourteen generations, and from David to the deportation to Babylon fourteen generations, and from the deportation to Babylon to the Christ fourteen generations. (Matthew 1:1-17, ESV Bible)
The genealogy of Jesus through his only earthly parent, Mary, is carefully detailed in Matthew's account of the "king from heaven." According to prophecy, the Messiah must be from the lineage of King David (Jeremiah 23:5). While Greek translations of Matthew's text have caused some confusion regarding the genealogy, the ancient Hebrew text, from which the Aramaic and later Greek versions were translated, clearly outlines Mary’s lineage. It traces her father, Yoseph ben Yaakov, through the royal line of David, specifically through Solomon. In contrast, Luke's Gospel provides the genealogy of Mary’s husband, Yoseph ben Eli, through David’s son Nathan.
Luke's genealogy appears alongside Matthew's for comparison, and it becomes evident that the Yoseph ben Yaakov mentioned in Matthew 1:16 and the Yoseph ben Eli in Luke 3:23 are two different men with distinct genealogical lines tracing back to David. Despite sharing the same first name—a common occurrence in many cultures—these two Yosephs are unrelated, which led to confusion by a translator. A common practice of a woman marrying a man with the same first name as her father further contributed to this error.
Both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies trace Jesus' ancestry back to King David, though through different sons of David. Both Matthew’s and Luke’s genealogies in the image trace Jesus’ lineage through the tribe of Judah, specifically through David.
As to being a descendant of Joseph, besides having a father named Joseph, making Jesus the son of Joseph, is there any other evidence that Jesus could be able to fulfill the role of Messiah, son of Joseph?
Omri was a significant king of the northern kingdom of Israel, reigning from approximately 885–874 BCE. His rule is notable in both the Bible and external historical sources, though the biblical narrative offers relatively little detail about him compared to other kings. Omri is not explicitly described in the Bible as a direct descendant of Joseph, son of Jacob (from the tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh). However, Omri likely came from one of the northern tribes, and it’s possible, though not directly stated, that he could have had connections to the tribe of Ephraim or Manasseh, which were the tribes descended from Joseph. It begs to reason that if Omri was not a descendant of Joseph, the Ephraimites would not have accepted him as king.
Omri begat Ahab, Ahab begat Athaliah, who became queen of the southern kingdom of Judah through her marriage to King Jehoram of Judah (not to be confused with Jehoram of Israel). She was the only woman to rule over Judah. Through Athaliah’s son, Ahaziah of Judah, the seed of Joseph enters the lineage of David. The most notable child of Ahaziah is Joash, who later became king of Judah, continuing the Davidic lineage.
Matthew, in structuring the genealogy, presents it in three sets of 14 generations (Matthew 1:17). To maintain this symmetry, he omits several kings from the lineage, including Ahaziah, Joash, and Amaziah. This deliberate compression of the genealogy was not uncommon in ancient genealogies, where selective omissions could be made for literary or symbolic purposes. While Joash is skipped in Matthew’s account, his lineage is still present, as Matthew follows the royal line of David. Joash was the great-grandson of Jehoram (Joram) and the grandfather of Uzziah, so he remains part of the Davidic lineage that leads to Jesus, even though Matthew does not list him by name.
Genetically, it is possible to have all four messianic types represented in one person, Jesus, the Messiah.
Once objection to Jesus being the Messiah is related to tribal identity coming from the father. How can he be a true son of David if he was born of a virgin? The whole notion of a virgin birth has been used as a refutation of Jesus Davidic lineage. However, only through a matrilineal lineage can all of the promises and expectations of various Messiah’s be fulfilled. He also contains Gentile DNA as well. He is qualified to be the savior of the entire world.
Messiah ben Joseph Examples in Jewish Literature
There are numerous references to Messiah ben Joseph throughout Jewish literature. Below, we will explore a few key examples. For a comprehensive collection, I recommend Dr. David Mitchell's work, Messiah ben Joseph. You can also access my detailed review of the book by clicking here.
The Idea of a Suffering Messiah Begins in Genesis 3:15
The first major topic is the "Seed of the Woman," rooted in Genesis 3:15, where God speaks to the serpent after the fall of Adam and Eve:
And I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your seed and her seed; he will crush your head, and you will strike his heel (Gen. 3.15).
This verse is pivotal in biblical prophecy, foretelling the struggle between the woman's seed and the serpent, ultimately leading to the serpent's defeat. The expression "seed of the woman" is highlighted as unusual since Hebrew thought typically recognizes offspring as the seed of the male. This peculiarity points to a unique man, often interpreted as the Messiah, destined to crush the serpent's head while suffering in the process.
The chapter then delves into Israelite interpretation, particularly through the Targum Yerushalmi, an Aramaic paraphrase and interpretation of the Hebrew Bible, which applies this prophecy to the Messiah:
Nevertheless there shall be a medicine for the sons of the woman, but for you, serpent, there shall be no medicine. But it shall be that for these there shall be a remedy for the heel in the days of the king Messiah.'
The Targum Yerushalmi's interpretation emphasizes a dual outcome: humanity will ultimately receive healing and redemption through a "medicine" provided during the messianic era, while the serpent, symbolizing evil, will have no remedy or redemption. This prophetic vision situates the ultimate healing of humanity and the defeat of evil in the time of the Messiah's reign, referred to as the "days of the king Messiah." It reassures that despite the serpent's temporary infliction of harm ("striking the heel"), there will be a remedy, underscoring the Messiah's role in bringing about final victory over evil and the restoration of humanity. This interpretation reflects the broader Jewish messianic expectation of a future era of peace, justice, and ultimate triumph over evil.
Genesis 49: The First Foreshadowing of Messiah ben Joseph
This Blessing of Jacob in Genesis 49, where Jacob prophesies the future of his sons. There is mention of "the last days" that occurs at the beginning of Jacob's prophetic blessings over his sons. Specifically, it is found in Genesis 49:1, where Jacob calls his sons together and tells them what will happen to them "in the last days" (or "in the days to come," depending on the translation). Here is the verse:
Genesis 49:1 (KJV): "And Jacob called unto his sons, and said, Gather yourselves together, that I may tell you that which shall befall you in the last days."
This phrase introduces the prophetic nature of Jacob’s blessings, which not only speak to the immediate future of his sons and their descendants but also carry a forward-looking, often eschatological, tone concerning the destiny of the tribes of Israel in the future.
The messianic significance of Judah’s blessing is well-known, particularly the promise of a ruler from Judah’s line until Shiloh comes (Genesis 49:10), symbolizing the eventual coming of a world ruler. However, the less familiar blessing of Joseph is the area of focus. Joseph, viewed as the ideal righteous man (tsadik), receives the longest and most complete blessing, marked by the frequent mention of "bless" or "blessings," symbolizing divine favor. Joseph’s life, filled with suffering and betrayal, is recounted as he rises from the depths of slavery to the heights of power in Egypt. Despite his trials, Joseph remains faithful, and Jacob’s blessing over him speaks of future greatness and the enduring divine favor.
A key element is the metaphor of the Shepherd-Rock, which refers to a coming ruler from Joseph’s line, a divine figure compared to the promised ruler from Judah. This Shepherd-Rock, identified by some commentators like Ramban as a future messianic figure, links Joseph's blessing to the broader messianic expectation in Jewish tradition, where the coming "Rock" signifies both divine leadership and kingship. Ramban says, in his comments on Deuteronomy 32.4, that this Rock from Joseph is the same Rock or Stone as is spoken of in Psalm 118.22.
And he [Moses] said: Let my teaching fall like rain. For that which he brought from the heavens, and his speech on the earth, will fall upon Israel, and settle upon them like dew (Deut. 32.2). For I will proclaim the name of Ha-Shem in the heavens; come, declare the greatness of our God (Deut. 32.3) in the earth. The Rock, his work is perfect, etc. (Deut. 32.4)]. And all Israel will say also the rock is Joshua, a sign about this land, for, From thence a Shepherd-Rock of Israel (Gen. 49.24). And it was interpreted long ago: The rock rejected by the builders has become the capstone; this is from HaShem, etc. (Ps. 118.22-23). And that is why Joshua said, This rock will be a witness between us (Josh. 24.27). Also, For behold the rock which I have set before Joshua: upon one rock are seven eyes (Zech. 3.9). Let the wise understand.
Ramban's commentary on Deuteronomy 32:4, identifies the Rock with both the Eternal and Joshua. Ramban's interpretation foresees a future messianic figure, the Joshua Messiah, who embodies the Shepherd-Rock and fulfills the divine promise.
Joshua was a descendant of Joseph. Joshua, the leader who succeeded Moses and led the Israelites into the Promised Land, was from the tribe of Ephraim, one of the two sons of Joseph. This is explicitly stated in Numbers 13:8, where Joshua is referred to as "Hoshea son of Nun" from the tribe of Ephraim. Later, in Numbers 13:16, Moses renames Hoshea as Joshua (Yehoshua).
The Life of Joseph
There is rich biblical symbolism surrounding Joseph, one of the key patriarchs in Genesis, and emphasizes his unique role among the tribes of Israel. Although Joseph is not the firstborn by birth, Jacob grants him the rights of the firstborn after Reuben’s failure, making Joseph the spiritual firstborn of Israel. Jacob demonstrates this by giving Joseph special garments, authority over his brothers, and the double portion of the firstborn (Genesis 37:2-14; 48:22). Joseph's two sons, Ephraim and Manasseh, are also elevated, as Jacob adopts them as his own, granting them each a tribe's inheritance (Genesis 48:5-16).
Ephraim is given further prominence over Manasseh through Jacob's blessing, a status reflected in later scriptures like Amos and Jeremiah, where Ephraim is referred to as the "firstborn son" and "darling lad" (Jeremiah 31:9, 20). Joseph is depicted as a "fruitful shoot upon a spring" (Genesis 49:22), symbolizing vitality and prosperity, which is echoed in other biblical references, such as his son Ephraim’s name, meaning "twice fruitful."
The imagery of Joseph being attacked by "archers" (Genesis 49:23) symbolizes the betrayals and trials he endured, including his brothers’ treachery and false accusations. This suffering, however, prefigures the Messiah, often portrayed as innocent, betrayed, and eventually exalted. Prophets like Jeremiah see parallels between their own experiences of persecution and Joseph’s story (Jeremiah 9:3, 8).
Finally, while Joseph is not assigned an animal symbol in Jacob's blessing, Moses later provides one, completing the portrayal of Joseph’s significant and prophetic role within the broader biblical narrative. Joseph’s story, filled with betrayal and eventual triumph, foreshadows the coming of a greater Shepherd-Messiah who will also endure suffering and be exalted.
Jacob’s and Moses' blessings on Joseph are closely related, with Moses expanding upon the themes introduced by Jacob. Both patriarchs emphasize Joseph’s prosperity and divine favor, using rich agricultural metaphors to symbolize fruitfulness and abundance. Jacob’s blessing in Genesis describes Joseph’s inheritance of blessings from heaven and the earth, including "the eternal hills," indicating divine favor that stretches across both natural and supernatural realms. Similarly, Moses in Deuteronomy grants Joseph a lavish blessing, which, like Jacob’s, focuses on prosperity but also adapts to the context of Israel’s time in the desert, highlighting divine provisions in that challenging environment. A fascinating part of both blessings is the comparison of Joseph to two types of oxen.
Deuteronomy 33:17
Before getting in to Deuteronomy 33, we need to look at some context in Deuteronomy 31, which marks the final stage of Moses' leadership as he prepares the Israelites for his imminent death and the transition to Joshua's leadership. It is a pivotal chapter in which Moses gives his last instructions and warnings to the people of Israel before they enter the Promised Land. In verses 16-18, God reveals to Moses that after his death, the people will turn away from Him and worship other gods (v. 16). As a result, God's anger will be kindled against Israel, and He will hide His face from them, allowing disaster to befall them (vv. 17-18). This is a prophetic warning that, despite the people entering the Promised Land, they will eventually break the covenant and experience the consequences of disobedience.
To ensure that Israel will not forget their covenant with God, God commands Moses to write down a song that will serve as a witness against the people when they rebel (v. 19-22). The song will act as a reminder of the covenant and will serve as a witness to the future generation when they inevitably turn away from God (v. 19). Moses writes down the song on that same day and begins to teach it to the Israelites (v. 22). The song, recorded in Deuteronomy 32, will recount God’s faithfulness and warn Israel of the consequences of disobedience.
In verses 27-30, Moses calls the elders and officials of Israel together and delivers a final warning. He reminds them of their stubbornness and rebelliousness, predicting that they will turn away from God after his death (vv. 27-29). Moses declares that he will recite the song (which will be recorded in Deuteronomy 32) as a testimony against the people, reminding them of their responsibilities and the consequences of disobedience (v. 30):
“For I know that after my death you will surely act corruptly and turn aside from the way that I have commanded you. And in the days to come [literally, "in the latter days"] evil will befall you, because you will do what is evil in the sight of the LORD, provoking him to anger through the work of your hands.” (Deuteronomy 31:29, ESV Bible)
The phrase "the latter days" in Hebrew is בְּאַחֲרִית הַיָּמִים (be'acharit hayamim), which is often used in prophetic texts to refer to a distant future time, sometimes interpreted eschatologically (referring to end-time events). This theme of "the last days" carries through other prophetic writings in the Bible, and in some interpretations, it points to the eschatological future when God's ultimate plan for Israel and the world will be fulfilled.
Deuteronomy 33:13-17 is part of Moses’ final blessing upon the tribes of Israel before his death. Each tribe is addressed individually, with a specific blessing or prophecy regarding their future. In these verses, Moses specifically blesses the tribe of Joseph, which is traditionally understood to include the two half-tribes of Ephraim and Manasseh, the sons of Joseph. The blessing emphasizes both material abundance and military strength, while also drawing on rich imagery that is symbolic of Joseph’s legacy and his future descendants:
And of Joseph he said: Blessed by the LORD be his land, with the choice gifts of heaven above, and of the deep that lies beneath; with the choice fruits of the sun, and the rich yield of the months; with the finest produce of the ancient mountains, and the abundance of the everlasting hills; with the choice gifts of the earth and its fullness, and the favor of the one who dwells on Sinai. Let these come on the head of Joseph, on the brow of the prince among his brothers. A firstborn bull—majesty is his! His horns are the horns of a wild ox; with them he gores the peoples, driving them to the ends of the earth; such are the myriads of Ephraim, such the thousands of Manasseh. (Deuteronomy 33:13-17, NRSV Bible)
In this passage, Moses prophesies about Joseph’s descendants, using the imagery of two different oxen: a domestic ox (shor) and a wild ox (reem). Some important imagery and symbolism are captured in the original Hebrew text, though it may not be immediately obvious without context. Here’s a closer look at the key Hebrew terms and how they convey the contrast between the shor (domestic ox) and the reem (wild ox):
Original Hebrew (Deuteronomy 33:17):
בְּכוֹר שׁוֹרוֹ הָדָר לוֹ
(bekhor shoro hadar lo)"His firstborn bull is his glory..."
וְקַרְנֵי רְאֵם קַרְנָיו
(vekarnei re’em karnav)"...and the horns of a wild ox are his horns."
Key Hebrew Terms:
שׁוֹר (Shor) – The term "shor" refers to a domestic, servile ox or bull, commonly used for labor and often associated with sacrifice. In Israelite law, the firstborn ox was particularly significant because it was designated for sacrifice (Numbers 18:17).
Numbers 18:17 in the original Hebrew reads as follows:
כִּי אֵת בְּכוֹר שׁוֹר אוֹ־בְכוֹר כֶּשֶׂב אוֹ־בְכוֹר עֵז לֹא תִפְדֶּה קֹדֶשׁ הֵם אֶת־דָּמָם תִּזְרֹק עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְאֶת־חֶלְבָּם תַּקְטִיר אִשֵּׁה לְרֵיחַ נִיחֹחַ לַיהוָה:
Transliteration: Ki et b'chor shor o-b'chor kesev o-b'chor ez lo tifdeh, kodesh hem; et-damam tizrok al-hamizbeach ve'et-chelbam taktir isheh l'reyach nichoach laYHVH.
Translation: "But the firstborn of a cow, the firstborn of a sheep, or the firstborn of a goat you shall not redeem; they are holy. You shall sprinkle their blood upon the altar, and their fat you shall burn as a food offering, a pleasing aroma to the LORD."
שׁוֹר (shor), כֶּשֶׂב (kesev), עֵז (ez) – These terms refer to animals: a bull/cow (shor), a sheep (kesev), and a goat (ez). The firstborn of these animals were to be offered to God.
דָּמָם תִּזְרֹק עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ (damam tizrok al-hamizbeach) – "You shall sprinkle their blood on the altar." The sprinkling of blood on the altar was part of the sacrificial ritual. Blood in the Hebrew Bible symbolizes life, and its offering is essential in atonement practices.
This imagery reflects the idea of servitude and sacrificial death, fitting with the description of Messiah ben Joseph.
רְאֵם (Re’em) – The word "reem" refers to the wild ox or aurochs, a large, untamable animal that was known for its strength and fierceness. The last of its kind perished in Poland in the 17th century, but in its prime, it was a formidable creature. Julius Caesar himself encountered this fearsome beast in the Black Forest, describing it as nearly the size of an elephant. Towering two meters tall at the shoulder, with massive black horns reaching up to three meters, it was a sight to behold. Caesar also noted that it harbored an intense hatred for mankind—every time it spotted a human, it would charge without hesitation. In ancient times, the reem symbolized power and dominion, as it was feared and respected by various cultures. This wild ox contrasts sharply with the domestic shor, as the reem embodies freedom, strength, and conquest.
Re’em - Wild ox or aurochs.
Symbolism in the Hebrew:
Shor (שׁוֹר) is associated with servitude, burden-bearing, and sacrifice. The fact that the shor is a firstborn highlights its destined role in the sacrificial system, symbolizing one who is bound to die for a higher purpose. This is a strong image of Messiah ben Joseph, who suffers and sacrifices for the people.
Re’em (רְאֵם), on the other hand, is the symbol of untamed power and freedom. It represents strength, victory, and kingship. In this passage, the firstborn ox (shor) receives the horns of the re’em, symbolizing a transformation from suffering and sacrifice to kingship and conquest. This mirrors the messianic expectation of one who suffers first but is later exalted, akin to Messiah ben David.
The contrast between them is stark and absolute. What one was, the other was not. The shor was a slave; the re’em, a conqueror. The shor lived in obscurity, while the re’em commanded fear. The shor was bound and tethered among human dwellings, but the re’em roamed wild through forest and field. Most striking of all, the firstborn of a shor was fated to die as a victim, yet the re’em had no place in Israel's sacrificial system. One was gradually enslaved, destined for slaughter; the other was sovereign, free, and bound to life.
The life of Joseph reflects this contrast. Like the shor, he begins as a slave, bound to a life of suffering and obscurity. But through divine providence, he rises to a position of power, becoming a ruler in Egypt—ultimately resembling the re’em, symbolizing strength and leadership. This transformation from suffering servant to exalted ruler echoes the dual messianic roles of suffering (Messiah ben Joseph) and kingship (Messiah ben David).
Thus, the juxtaposition of the shor and the re’em not only captures the messianic hope but also serves as a metaphor for Joseph’s own journey from suffering to sovereignty, embodying both sacrifice and triumph.
Moses uses powerful imagery that goes beyond a literal reference to oxen. The shor (ox) and the re’em (wild ox or unicorn) are symbolic representations, not merely of animals, but of the messianic hero promised to Joseph and his descendants. Moses speaks of a future figure who will rise from Joseph’s line—a deliverer who embodies both sacrifice and kingship, themes echoed throughout the Hebrew Bible. This is a profound image of redemption and victory—the suffering servant becomes a conquering king, much like the dual messianic roles of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David.
The transformation of the shor into a re’em is not a result of evading sacrifice or avoiding his destined suffering. Heroes, especially in the biblical narrative, do not escape their fate or shirk their duties. Instead, the path to glory is through the very suffering and sacrifice they are destined to endure. The exaltation of this hero comes only after he embraces his role as the shor, fulfilling the sacrificial purpose before being crowned with the horns of the re’em. It is through this process of suffering, submission, and ultimate faithfulness that the lowly shor is transformed into the regal, unconquered re’em.
This journey mirrors the biblical concept of the suffering servant being exalted after enduring trial, much like the messianic expectation that one must suffer before being crowned in glory. The hero’s path to kingship is paved by sacrifice, but it is this very sacrifice that qualifies him for the crown of the re’em. His willingness to fulfill his destiny, not avoid it, is what leads to his transformation and ultimate triumph. Thus, Moses' blessing in Deuteronomy 33 is not just a statement about the future of Joseph's tribe but a profound prophetic picture of the messianic hero who will rise, suffer, and ultimately reign.
Isaiah
Isaiah's "suffering king" has long been interpreted as a messianic figure, with later interpretations linking him to Messiah ben Joseph. Four aspects of the prophecy in Isaiah support this connection:
Parallels with Joseph's Life: Like Joseph, Isaiah's kingly figure is beloved by God, betrayed, and subjected to suffering and death. Despite this, both Joseph and the servant figure bring life to their people through their suffering and are ultimately vindicated and elevated to positions of sovereignty.
The Imagery of a Fruitful Plant: Isaiah’s servant is described as a sprout growing out of dry ground (Isa. 53:2), which mirrors Joseph being a fruitful plant by a spring (Gen. 49:22). Although the ground near Joseph’s spring is not explicitly dry, his trials in Egypt—marked by hardship—suggest a symbolic dryness. This idea of fruitfulness in adversity is also reflected in passages like Psalm 1:3 and Jeremiah 17:8, where a tree thrives despite harsh conditions.
Piercing Imagery: Just as Joseph is metaphorically attacked by archers in Jacob's blessing (Gen. 49:23-24), Isaiah’s figure is "pierced-through" (Isa. 53:5). While Joseph’s attackers are symbolic, the treachery against him cuts deep, paralleling the actual piercing in Isaiah's prophecy.
Silent Lamb Imagery and Rachel: Isaiah's servant is compared to a ewe-lamb silent before its shearers (Isa. 53:7), which recalls Rachel, Joseph's mother, who was a shepherdess. Rachel is closely associated with the northern tribes, Ephraim and Manasseh, adding a layer of connection between Joseph’s lineage and the servant figure.
The text in Isaiah appears to reference a future figure, not a historical one like Joseph or Joshua. The servant’s suffering bears fruit in the future, pointing to a coming messianic ruler from Joseph’s line, as promised in the blessings of Jacob and Moses. This suggests that Isaiah’s "Suffering Servant" may represent a future second Joseph, much like the concept of a second Moses in Jewish tradition.
Habakkuk
Habakkuk 3, written around the rise of Babylonian power in 612 BCE, includes a prophetic reflection on God's past deliverance of His people. Specifically, in Habakkuk 3:11-13, the prophet recalls an event where God caused the sun and moon to stand still to save His people and His "anointed" (mashiah). This is a direct reference to Joshua’s battle against the Amorites in Joshua 10:12-14, where God miraculously stopped the sun and moon to give Joshua the time needed to achieve victory.
Habakkuk, facing the imminent threat of Babylon, draws on this past event to express hope for future deliverance. He sees the historical event as a foreshadowing of another divine intervention, where a future mashiah (anointed one) will arise to save Israel from the Babylonians just as Joshua saved Israel from the Amorites. The Greek Sexta translation makes this connection explicit by stating that God saved His people "by Joshua your Messiah," referring to Joshua as a type of messianic figure.
The idea here is that Joshua’s role as a mashiah, or anointed one, who led Israel to victory, foreshadows a future deliverer—another "Joshua" or a Josephite prince, from the tribe of Joseph in Ephraim—who will defeat Israel’s enemies, this time Babylon. Habakkuk’s longing for another deliverance like that of Joshua reveals a messianic expectation, where God will once again intervene dramatically to save His people from oppression and judgment.
Zechariah
Zechariah, prophesying during the late 6th century BCE, anticipates the restoration and reunification of Judah and the Josephites (often represented by Ephraim) as the exiles return from Babylon. He draws on rich symbolism to portray future events, weaving in elements of past biblical figures and adding eschatological dimensions to his vision.
Zechariah begins by referencing a future Messiah, drawing a parallel to Joshua, the descendant of Joseph. This Messiah is seen as a leader who will reunite the divided tribes, particularly Judah and Ephraim, and lead them to victory over their enemies, much like Joshua led Israel to victory in ancient times. Zechariah also envisions a king who will bring peace, ruling from sea to sea, emphasizing both justice and humility—depicted as riding a donkey, a symbol of peace and humility. This imagery reflects a Davidic figure, continuing the royal lineage, but it also brings out elements of Joseph as a powerful but suffering figure.
In his prophecies, Zechariah introduces two critical messianic figures:
The Stricken Shepherd: A metaphorical king, who is described as being struck down, symbolic of betrayal and suffering. This shepherd is identified as the ETERNAL’s shepherd, connecting his fate directly to God’s purposes.
The Pierced King: Another royal figure who is pierced, leading to national mourning. The piercing of this king is seen as an act that evokes divine empathy, as it is described as if the ETERNAL Himself were pierced.
These two figures are closely connected, and Zechariah suggests they are one and the same—a messianic figure who suffers betrayal and death but will ultimately triumph. The shepherd’s and king’s suffering is linked to the breaking of the bond between Judah and Ephraim, symbolizing the divided kingdom of Israel. This mirrors Joseph’s betrayal by his brothers in Genesis, where Joseph’s suffering led to life for his family, and ultimately, Israel. Zechariah draws a similar parallel: the suffering and death of this messianic figure will open a fountain of cleansing, representing the forgiveness of sins and renewal for the people.
In essence, Zechariah presents a composite Messiah who combines the royal wisdom of Solomon with the suffering and redemptive role of Joseph. This Messiah will be a divine ruler, one who experiences betrayal and death, but whose sacrifice brings about the restoration of Israel and the salvation of nations. His prophecies merge ideas from earlier prophets like Isaiah and Ezekiel, presenting a unique vision of a Messiah who embodies both kingly authority and sacrificial suffering, ultimately leading to the renewal of the world.
Psalms
The Psalms begin with David and end with David, but in the middle, the focus shifts to Joseph. In Psalms 80 and 81, we encounter a figure referred to as Yehosef. Now, how do we explain this name, Yehosef? In Hebrew, it's quite striking—it appears to be a combination of Judah and Joseph. The name Yehosef seems to blend elements of Yehudah (Judah), Yosef (Joseph), and possibly even Yehovah (the name of God), combining these names into one. So what we see here is a reference to a Messiah figure who represents both Joseph and Judah, with a divine connection, just as promised in Genesis 49:24—where the shepherd and rock from Shaddai would come.
Now, back to the Psalms. In his exploration of the Psalms as a cohesive book—rather than a collection of individual psalms—Dr. David Mitchell realized that this structural insight comes from studying its design. What’s fascinating is that when you consider the Psalms as a unified book, scholars have long seen Psalms 1 and 2 as the introduction to the entire collection, the pillars at the entrance of the book.
You brought up something intriguing: the idea that Psalm 1 presents a Joseph-like Messiah, while Psalm 2 introduces a Davidic Messiah. The Messiah in Psalm 1 is portrayed as Joshua, meditating on the Torah day and night, just as Joshua was instructed in Joshua 1:8. But this Messiah is also like Joseph, symbolized as a tree planted by streams of water. If we look back at Genesis 49, Joseph is described as a plant that springs from dry ground, with branches that extend over the wall—an image of growth and blessing, much like the tree in Psalm 1.
So in Psalm 1, we have a Messiah who embodies both Joseph and Joshua. But then, in Psalm 2, the Messiah is depicted as one who sits on Mount Zion, clearly a reference to a Davidic Messiah from the line of David. These two Psalms, when read together, lay out the overarching message of the entire Psalter, from beginning to end: the Messiah is the wise man who meditates on the Torah, and despite opposition, he will prosper because his roots are by streams of water. In the end, he will conquer his enemies and rule from Mount Zion.
Together, Psalm 1 and 2 paint a unified portrait of the one Messiah: in Psalm 1, he is like Joseph and Joshua, while in Psalm 2, he is like David. The Messiah begins as Joseph, humble and wise, and ends as David, the victorious king.
Dead Sea Scrolls - 4Q372
The manuscript 4Q372, often called The Joseph Apocryphon, is an ancient text discovered near the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim. It dates from around 50 BCE and contains several fragments that discuss Joseph. Scholars have debated the meaning of 'Joseph' in the text, with some suggesting it refers to the northern tribes of Israel, making the text an anti-Samaritan polemic. However, this interpretation faces challenges.
The text describes the destruction of Jerusalem and the southern tribes by foreign invaders, which doesn’t align with the historical division between the northern and southern kingdoms. Additionally, 'Joseph' is depicted as righteous and blameless, which contrasts with the idolatry often associated with the northern kingdom.
Linguistic analysis of the text shows that Joseph is referred to as an individual, rather than a collective group of tribes, and is portrayed as suffering, calling out to God for deliverance. His cry mirrors messianic psalms, such as Psalm 89:26, linking him to messianic expectations, particularly the Messiah ben Joseph figure. This suffering Joseph is viewed as a future ruler who will rise to deliver Israel, suggesting a possible resurrection, which is a theme found in other Dead Sea Scrolls.
In essence, 4Q372 portrays Joseph as a messianic figure who suffers and will eventually rise to execute justice, aligning with the concept of the Messiah ben Joseph—a figure prophesied to suffer and later lead Israel. This manuscript may represent one of the earliest post-biblical references to a suffering Josephite messiah.
Sukah 52
The New Testament
When reading the New Testament, it's clear that Jesus is frequently portrayed as the Messiah, the Son of David. However, is there any indication that the New Testament writers also viewed him as the Messiah, son of Joseph? Interestingly, throughout the canonical Gospels, Jesus never explicitly calls himself the Son of David. While Matthew, along with figures such as the angel Gabriel, blind Bartimaeus, the Canaanite woman, the Palm Sunday crowds, the children in the temple, and the apostles, all refer to him by this title, Jesus never makes this claim directly.
This doesn’t mean that Jesus rejects the identity of the Messiah, son of David. In fact, in Revelation, he refers to himself as both the "Root of David" and the "Offspring of David." However, in the canonical Gospels, he never uses this title for himself. When Jesus asks the Pharisees, "Whose son is the Messiah?" and they reply, "David’s son," Jesus responds, "How can he be David’s son if David calls him ‘Lord’? Here, Jesus seems to challenge or redefine the typical understanding of the Messiah, son of David, at least in this context.
The Parable of the Tenets
There are moments in the New Testament where Jesus seems to align himself with a Joseph-like figure. One such instance is in Mark 12:6-7, within the Parable of the Tenants, where the landowner sends his beloved son after sending many servants. The tenants plot to kill the son, recognizing him as the heir:
"He had one more to send, a beloved son; he sent him last of all, saying, 'They will respect my son.' But those tenants said to one another, 'This is the heir; come, let’s kill him, and the inheritance will be ours!'” (Mark 12:6-7)
Interestingly, this language echoes the Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) version of Genesis 37, where Joseph’s brothers see him approaching from afar and conspire to kill him:
"When they saw him from a distance and before he came closer to them, they plotted against him to kill him. They said to one another, 'Here comes this dreamer! Now then, come and let’s kill him...'" (Genesis 37:18-19, LXX)
The similar phrasing and structure in these passages highlight a thematic connection between Joseph and the beloved sonin the parable. Both figures—Joseph and the son in Mark—are cherished individuals who face rejection, conspiracy, and murder plots from those close to them, emphasizing their unique, favored status.
By echoing the language of Joseph's betrayal, Jesus appears to draw a parallel between his own impending rejection and Joseph’s betrayal by his brothers. This connection is significant because just as Joseph was betrayed by his brothers, Jesus would also be rejected and betrayed by his own people, reinforcing the theme of the suffering servant.
Another interesting point is that according to the parable, it takes place at a vineyard. Throughout the Old Testament, Joseph is consistently associated with the image of the vine. This point was overlooked by Dr. Mitchell but as we will see later, is consistent with the Joseph like imagery.
Mark 12:6-7 has often been interpreted by some as a justification for supersessionism (also known as replacement theology), which asserts that the Church has replaced Israel in God’s redemptive plan due to Israel’s rejection of Jesus as the Messiah. Specifically, this passage is seen as suggesting that Israel’s rejection of the beloved son (Jesus) leads to God rejecting Israel and transferring the "inheritance" (the covenant blessings) to the Gentiles (the Church). This view argues that, because Israel rejected and crucified the Messiah, the Church now becomes the new "people of God," inheriting the promises originally given to Israel.
However, if we understand this parable in light of Jesus being compared to a Joseph-like figure, the interpretation shifts. Rather than signaling Israel's rejection, it points to Israel’s redemption through their rejection of Jesus. Just as Joseph’s rejection by his brothers ultimately led to their salvation during the famine, Jesus' rejection by his own people does not signify God’s abandonment of Israel but rather becomes the means by which redemption and reconciliation are made possible.
Jesus Quotes Psalm 118
In Mark 12:10, Jesus quotes from Psalm 118:
"Have you not even read this Scripture: 'The stone which the builders rejected, this has become the chief cornerstone; this came about from the Lord, and it is marvelous in our eyes.'” (Mark 12:10)
Many Jewish commentators, including some rabbis, have interpreted this verse in Psalm 118 as referring to the Messiah, son of Joseph—the suffering and rejected messiah figure who, like Joseph in Genesis, is cast aside but ultimately plays a pivotal role in God’s plan. Ramban (Nachmanides) also alludes to the concept of the "Shepherd's Stone" in his comments on Genesis 49:24, where the "stone of Israel" is associated with Messiah ben Joseph, a leader who suffers but ultimately contributes to Israel's redemption.
It’s remarkable that Yeshua (Jesus) refers to this specific verse, highlighting himself as the rejected stone who becomes the cornerstone, which reflects both the rejection and future exaltation of the Messiah ben Joseph figure. This connection to the "Shepherd's Stone" and Genesis 49:24 underscores a deeper, prophetic layer of Jesus' role in God's redemptive plan.
John 1
In John chapter 1, we encounter Philip's testimony, where he proclaims that they have found the one Moses and the prophets spoke of. And who does Philip identify? He says it is Yeshua ben Yosef of Nazareth, declaring Jesus as both the Son of God and the King of Israel. Interestingly, Philip calls him Yeshua ben Joseph, linking Jesus to the son of Joseph. This reference carries significant weight, especially when we consider its possible messianic connotations.
The idea of Messiah ben Yosef (Messiah, son of Joseph) was already circulating by the time of the Talmudic discussions. In Bavli Sukkah 52a, for instance, Rabbi Dosa and his contemporaries were familiar with the concept of Messiah ben Yosef, a suffering messiah figure. Some scholars trace this figure back even earlier, drawing on sources like the Targum and Zechariah 12:10, where a suffering figure connected to Joseph is mourned.
Thus, by the time John’s Gospel was written, the term Messiah ben Yosef would not have been unfamiliar. It’s possible that John, and perhaps Philip, were alluding to this same figure the rabbis discussed. Of course, some might argue that Philip was simply referring to Jesus as the literal son of Joseph (his earthly father), but the deeper significance of the title, especially considering its messianic overtones, cannot be overlooked.
In addition, according to some rabbinic traditions, the Messiah son of Joseph was expected to come from Galilee, which aligns with Philip’s emphasis that Yeshua ben Yosef was from Nazareth in Galilee. This connection further strengthens the idea that Jesus is being presented not only as the Davidic Messiah but also as the Joseph-like Messiah, the one long anticipated by Jewish expectation.
The Name Jesus Properly Understood
In English, we say the name Jesus, but this is actually a transliteration of the Greek name Ἰησοῦς (Iēsous). The Greek form doesn’t convey a meaning on its own but is derived from the Hebrew name Yehoshua (יְהוֹשֻׁעַ), which means "Yehovah (Name of God) saves." Over time, Yehoshua was shortened and Aramaized into Yeshua (יֵשׁוּעַ), carrying the same meaning: "The Lord saves."
When the name was transliterated into Greek, the language didn’t have the "sh" sound, so Yeshua became Iēsous in Greek. Additionally, Greek names often end in "s," leading to Iēsous instead of a direct equivalent of Yeshua. As this name passed into Latin and then into English, it became Jesus.
In essence, Jesus and Joshua share the same Hebrew root, meaning "Yehovah saves." This is confirmed in texts like the book of Hebrews, where Joshua (the Old Testament figure) is also referred to with the same Greek name Iēsous. Therefore, Jesus in Greek can also be understood as Joshua, a son of Joseph. This emphasizes Jesus’ role as the Savior, much like Joshua, son of Joseph, who was a deliverer for Israel.
John 6:42
We see a similar situation in John 6:42, where the crowds are confused about Jesus’ identity. They ask, "Is this not Yeshua ben Yosef, whose father and mother we know? How can he say, 'I came down from heaven'?" This reference to Yeshua ben Yosef is significant, as it recalls the promise made in Genesis 49:24—that the shepherd, the stone of Israel (often associated with Joseph) would come from Shaddai (God Almighty). So, when Jesus says he has come down from heaven, it aligns with the prophetic expectation of a deliverer from the line of Joseph.
Most readers, when encountering the name Jesus, son of Joseph, automatically think it refers to Joseph, the husband of Mary. However, this name carries a double meaning—a double entendre. While Joseph was indeed his earthly father, the title “son of Joseph” also serves to point toward the Messiah ben Joseph, the figure expected to emerge from the tribe of Ephraim, often symbolized by Joseph.
As for the audience of John’s Gospel, Dr. Mitchell believes John is addressing the Galileans. While some scholars argue that his audience could be Judeans or Samaritans, there’s a strong case that his focus is on Galileans, who had distinct cultural and ancestral roots. Unlike the Judeans, who were from the tribe of Judah, many Galileans were of Ephraimite descent—descendants of Joseph’s tribes—who had been resettled in the region by Josiah and the Maccabees after the Assyrian exile. This background could explain why the title "son of Joseph" resonated so strongly with John’s Galilean audience, as it connected Jesus to the tribes of Joseph and the messianic expectations surrounding them.
The Samaritan Woman at the Well
The encounter with the woman at the well in John 4 holds profound symbolic meaning. In the Bible, a well, spring, or fountain often represents genealogical descent. For example, Proverbs 5 says, “Let your fountain be blessed,” referring to one’s lineage, specifically children and family. Similarly, Jacob’s well, located at the heart of the Samaritan community, carries deep significance in John’s Gospel, symbolizing the Samaritans' descent from Jacob and Joseph, since the Samaritans claim descent from Joseph. Although the Talmud attempts to reject this, it’s clear that, while of mixed blood, many Samaritans trace their lineage to Joseph.
Moreover, this well represents not just the past, but the Samaritans' hope in a particular descendant of Jacob and Joseph—the Tahib, their Messiah. The Tahib, meaning Restorer, is the Samaritan term for the Messiah. Unlike the Jews, they don’t use the term Messiah; instead, they eagerly await this Restorer, a figure descended from Joseph and Jacob, to bring them living water—eternal life.
When Jesus meets the Samaritan woman at the well, he reveals himself as this long-awaited figure, saying, “I am he” (John 4:26). In doing so, Jesus identifies himself not just as the Jewish Messiah, but as the Tahib—the one descended from Joseph, who will give living water. The woman recognizes this and goes to tell her whole community, confirming their hope in the coming of the Messiah.
This doesn’t deny that Jesus is also descended from David and thus qualifies as the Judean Messiah. In fact, Jesus uniquely fulfills both roles—descended from Joseph and Judah—making him the Messiah for both Samaritans and Jews alike. The Samaritan woman initially recognizes him as a Jew, but by the end of their conversation, Jesus reveals he is also her Messiah, the Tahib, fulfilling both genealogical and prophetic expectations.
John 11:54
In this chapter, Jesus withdraws to the town of Ephraim, where He stays for a time before heading to Jerusalem for Passover. Dr. Mitchell suggests that John, the author, portrays Jesus as the Messiah coming from Ephraim, journeying toward Jerusalem to face His death.
Jesus as the True Vine
Many people interpret "the vine" as symbolizing Israel, but Dr. Mitchell offers a different perspective. He believes the vine represents Joseph. In Genesis 49, Joseph is described as:
"Joseph is a fruitful branch, A fruitful branch by a spring; Its branches run over the wall." (Gen 49:22)
Throughout the Old Testament, Joseph is consistently associated with the image of the vine. One significant passage is from Isaiah:
"For the vineyard of the Lord of armies is the house of Israel, And the people of Judah are His delightful plant." (Isa 5:7)
In this passage, "the house of Israel" refers to the Northern Kingdom, which is descended from Joseph, while "Judah" refers to the Southern Kingdom. This division highlights the distinction between the tribes that descended from Joseph and those from Judah.
Another important reference comes from Psalm 80:
"You removed a vine from Egypt; You drove out the nations and planted it." (Psalm 80:8)
Psalm 80 is specifically about the descendants of Joseph, further linking the image of the vine with Joseph and his lineage.
When Jesus declares that He is the "true vine" (John 15:1), it is possible that He is identifying Himself as the "true Joseph"—the ultimate fulfillment of the vine imagery. Just as Joseph was a source of fruitfulness and life, Jesus, as the true vine, is the source of spiritual nourishment and salvation.
Jesus on the Cross Quotes Zachariah 12:10
Zechariah 12:10 is a key verse in rabbinic literature associated with Messiah ben Joseph. This connection is referenced in Targum Tosefta and the Talmud Sukka 52. The apostle John draws upon this verse twice in his writings, once in the Gospel of John and again in the book of Revelation.
In the Gospel, John writes:
"And again another Scripture says, 'They will look on him whom they have pierced.'" (John 19:37, ESV)
This verse reflects the fulfillment of the Old Testament prophecy (Zechariah 12:10), which foretells the piercing of Jesus during His crucifixion and the people's response as they witness His suffering.
In Revelation, John again echoes this prophecy:
"Behold, he is coming with the clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced him, and all tribes of the earth will wail on account of him. Even so. Amen." (Revelation 1:7, ESV)
Through these two references, John directly connects Jesus to the prophecy in Zechariah 12:10, emphasizing its fulfillment in both His crucifixion and His future return.
None of the other Gospels quote Zechariah 12:10—why is that? In rabbinic tradition, this verse is consistently associated with Messiah ben Joseph. Dr. Mitchell suggests that John's Gospel is specifically targeted at Galilean Jews, who are descendants of the tribes of Joseph and are anticipating a Messiah from Joseph's lineage. According to Dr. Mitchell, part of John's strategy is to present Jesus as the Messiah ben Joseph, aligning Him with the expectations of this particular audience.
Acts 7
Here, we see Philip addressing the people, highlighting how those from Jerusalem and Judea have historically rejected the saviors God has sent them. He begins with Joseph, recounting how his brothers betrayed and sold him, foreshadowing Joseph as a type or prefigure of Jesus. Following this, Philip turns to the Samaritans. It’s worth recalling John 1, where Philip refers to Jesus as "Messiah ben Joseph."
Jewish/Christian Division
What distinguishes Judaism from Christianity, in part, is the belief about the Messiah's death. Judaism traditionally holds that the Messiah is not meant to die, while Christianity teaches that the Messiah died and rose again. If the rabbis were to acknowledge that the Messiah's death has always been foretold, the division between the two faiths would diminish. This raises an important question: how does Judaism approach the concept of Messiah ben Joseph?
Judaism tends to be uncomfortable with the idea of Messiah ben Joseph because he bears a striking resemblance to Jesus. There is an effort to dismiss or downplay this figure. One common approach is to minimize Messiah ben Joseph by arguing that the Talmud only contains one or two minor references to him, making the idea unimportant. However, this is not accurate, as there are numerous verses that reference Messiah ben Joseph.
A second approach within Judaism is to downplay the significance of the Messiah altogether. Some argue that the Messiah is simply an anointed leader, not a figure destined to solve all of the world’s problems. In this view, Israel must address its own challenges without expecting divine intervention through the Messiah. In more extreme cases, some even deny the importance of the Messiah entirely, shifting the focus of Judaism away from messianic hope. However, the expectation of the Messiah is foundational to Judaism.
Another way Judaism addresses Messiah ben Joseph is by acknowledging that he dies but arguing that his death is not atoning. Dr. Mitchell has demonstrated through numerous passages that the death of Messiah ben Joseph is indeed atoning.
Lastly, some argue that Messiah ben Joseph was a later invention, developed after the time of Jesus. This perspective claims that there was no ancient prophecy about him. This argument has gained popularity over the past couple of centuries. However, the question arises: if Messiah ben Joseph only emerged after the time of Jesus, why would Judaism invent a figure who so closely resembles Jesus, the one they rejected?
Conclusion
Dr. Mitchell’s exploration of Messiah ben Joseph invites us to reconsider the breadth and complexity of Jewish messianic expectations. Far from being a recent invention, the figure of Messiah ben Joseph represents an ancient tradition of hope, suffering, and redemption. This figure not only enriches our understanding of Jewish theology but also offers a deeper perspective on the role of suffering in the messianic narrative, bridging connections between Jewish and Christian eschatological beliefs. Ultimately, Messiah ben Joseph, like Joseph himself, emerges as a vital piece in the unfolding story of redemption.