Sons of Joseph

What about this concept? We went along with this notion, without getting an understanding of when, where, and how it came from. The pair of terms Son of Joseph + Son of David is not original in the Hebrew Bible. There are an abundance of commentaries interpreting Son of Joseph into the biblical texts, but these are not original.

This series provides value in that there is a general structure to the history of the ideas and concepts of messianism, and then we should be able to relate various forms and examples into this, in one way or another. So we will begin a simple search of these terms, to figure it out. 

Quickly we find, that the phrases are present in the biblical commentators of the middle ages, Rashi and others, as Son of Joseph or Ephraim. In particular for the verse in Zechariah 12:10, “and they will gave upon he whom they have stabbed and mourned over him…” But they are not rampant, these interpretations, even in the classic commentators. 

The main original source is in the Talmud, here out of context (BT Sukkah 52:1-2): 

Apropos the eulogy at the end of days, the Gemara asks: For what is the nature of this eulogy? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis disagree concerning this matter. One said that this eulogy is for Messiah ben Joseph who was killed in the war of Gog from the land of Magog prior to the ultimate redemption with the coming of Messiah ben David. And one said that this eulogy is for the evil inclination that was killed. 

The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that the lament is for Messiah ben Joseph who was killed, this would be the meaning of that which is written in that context: “And they shall look unto Me because they have pierced through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his only son” (Zechariah 12:10). However, according to the one who said that the eulogy is for the evil inclination that was killed, does one need to conduct a eulogy for this? On the contrary, one should conduct a celebration. Why, then, did they cry?

The Sages taught: To Messiah ben David, who is destined to be revealed swiftly in our time, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: Ask of Me anything and I will give you whatever you wish, as it is stated: “I will tell of the decree; the Lord said unto me: You are My son, this day have I begotten you, ask of Me, and I will give the nations for your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for your possession” (Psalms 2:7–8). 

Once the Messiah ben David saw Messiah ben Joseph, who was killed, he says to the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, I ask of you only life; that I will not suffer the same fate. The Holy One, Blessed be He, says to him: Life? Even before you stated this request, your father, David, already prophesied about you with regard to this matter precisely, as it is stated: “He asked life of You, You gave it to him; even length of days for ever and ever” (Psalms 21:5)...

Apropos the end of days, the Gemara cites another verse and interprets it homiletically. It is stated: “The Lord then showed me four craftsmen” (Zechariah 2:3). Who are these four craftsmen? Rav Ḥana bar Bizna said that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida said: They are Messiah ben David, Messiah ben Joseph, Elijah, and the righteous High Priest, who will serve in the Messianic era.”

Without getting into the meaning of the text, we are presented with the phrases, which are new to us, as a concept, two separate Messiahs, but the text assumes we are already familiar with it.

In other words, the concept developed in the shadowlands of textual history. Presumably around the Talmudic and Midrash era, after the Mishna. Otherwise, it would introduce us to the new concept. But it assumes we know it already. So we can assume it was already there.

Notice that in Sanhedrin chapter cHelek, where most of the messianic interpretations and questions are addressed, verses that later are considered Son of Joseph, are addressed, but not as Son of Joseph, for example riding on a donkey Zechariah 9:9 and Isaiah 53.

Relevant Angle

It presumably developed first as a solution to a dilemma of sorts. As we experienced in the sessions on Talmudic literature, there first there were biblical sources that were associated with the Messiah, and then, when several of these seemed to contradict each other, then the interpreters came up with solutions. 

When there was the case of Jesus of Nazareth, many biblical verses were understood as messianic prophecy. Following his death and believed resurrection, and ascension, in his absence, his followers who wrote the New Testament, dealt solutions to Messiah as the great conquering king - he will come again, to fulfill the rest…

In the Talmud, without a particular messianic figure to deal with, they dealt with texts and came up with additional solutions to the variety of verses that they had already accepted as messianic prophecy - for example, conditional alternatives - if the people are good, he will come this way, if the people are bad, he will come this other way. 

Presumably, the Son of Joseph idea is exactly that, it stemmed from the clash of messianic prophecies, and at some point the idea was forged, that there are two different types of Messiah, presumably in the context of interpreting Zechariah 12:10 - presumably this was a Christian interpretation, that this is Jesus, who was pierced, and then it was accepted somehow that this is indeed about the Messiah, and the mainstream Jewish sages understood that it is of an alternative messianic figure - because they couldn’t just do away with the notion that this verse is messianic, so they direct it to an alternative messianic figure, away from Jesus. 

Zerubavel Striking

Alternatively, in the Book of Zerubavel, which came about in vague circumstances, somewhere somehow parallel to Talmudic and Midrashic literature, after the Mishna, there we find reference to a messianic type of figure, with the phrase Son of Joseph, one who is killed and such, nothing to do with Jesus, and tells more of a story of who this character is - but we cannot say how this exactly fits into or influenced Talmudic literature:

Concealed there as well is a man whose name is Nehemiah ben Hushiel ben Ephraim ben Joseph.’ Zerubbabel spoke up and said to Metatron and to Michael (sic) the prince: ‘My lord, I want you to tell me when the Messiah of the Lord will come and what will happen after all this!’ He said to me, ‘The Lord’s Messiah—Nehemiah ben Hushiel—will come five years after Hephsibah. He will collect all Israel together as one entity and they will remain for <four> years in Jerusalem, (where) the children of Israel will offer sacrifice, and it will be pleasing to the Lord. He will inscribe Israel in the genealogical lists according to their families. But in the fifth year of Nehemiah and the gathering together of the ‘holy ones,’ Šērōy the king of Persia will attack Nehemiah ben Hushiel and Israel, and there will be great suffering in Israel…

But Hephsibah, the mother of Menahem b. ‘Amiel, will remain stationed at the eastern gate, and that wicked one will not enter there, thereby confirming what was written: “but the remainder of the people will not be cut off from the city” (Zech 14:2). This battle will take place during the month of Av. Israel will experience distress such as there never was before. They will flee into towers, among mountains, and into caves, but they will be unable to hide from him. All the nations of the earth will go astray after him except for Israel, who will not believe in him. All Israel shall mourn Nehemiah b. Hushiel for forty-one days. His thoroughly crushed corpse will be thrown down before the gates of Jerusalem, but no animal, bird, or beast will touch it. Due to the intensity of the oppression and the great distress, the children of Israel will then cry out to the Lord, and the Lord will answer them.’

I am purposely refraining from the details of the story. The point is to display a parallel tradition of the figure of the same name.

Notice that Zechariah is referenced, but not chapter 12:10, but not far from it - 14:2, so it is close to the above reference of he who was pierced...

Either way, however this concept came about, it will become very useful in Jewish tradition, not just to handle different messianic expectations in tension with each other, but to make way for an original function, of another hero, another type - the Son of Joseph, who will pave the way, who will die tragically - a tragic hero, like Elijah, serving the Messiah and taking many of his functions.

It is essentially the main way for religious persons to be messianic themselves without assuming too much - they can’t get away with being the actual full Messiah, so they are a Messiah of Joseph.