Steefen
I am curious why Judah is so popular [for his tax revolt] but not mentioned as one of three.
Steefen
Judah of Galilee was not one of three in the Tax Revolt.
Judah/Judas of Galilee most likely is not the same person as Judas of Sephhoris, Galilee, son of Hezekias (arch/leading rebel).
There are two things:
1) The Judas-Simon-Athrongeus insurrection that resulted in 2,000 people being crucified | Wars of the Jews, Book 2, Chapter 4
2) The Judas of Galilee tax revolt | Wars of the Jews, Book 2, Chapter 8
Robert
I am not suggesting the Messiah of Ephraim can come from Samaria:
I am open to the possibility that the Messiah of Ephraim can come from Samaria.
And you have said, the Samaritan Redeemer could have been appealing to the Messiah of Ephraim tradition.
Steefen
Yes, that is the clarification I am making to the statement, the messiah of Joseph refers to the Samaritan Redeemer. [Source Dead Sea Scrolls]; hence, the Messiah of Joseph is sourced in the Dead Sea Scrolls. The Samaritan Redeemer is sourced from Josephus.
Robert, if you believe the Samaritan Redeemer had no Messiah tradition in Samaria to exploit, that is your opinion.
I see a messiah of Joseph/Ephraim [Samaria] tradition in the Dead Sea Scrolls for the Samaritan Redeemer to exploit.
Robert said
You are still completely misquoting me. Please tell me exactly which of the Dead Sea Scrolls you are referring to and what you think they are saying. Otherwise, I’m not sure how to correct your errors.
Your opinion on this subtopic of this thread is in error. Your opinion of yourself is in error, also.
Robert, you have other people with whom to converse. Do that: converse with other people.
So far as I am concerned, this exchange with you is over.
Biblical Archaeology Review
September/October 2008
“The Messiah Son of Joseph: ‘Gabriel’s Revelation’ and the Birth of a New Messianic Model”
by Israel Knohl
Some evidence, however, indicates that the figure of “Messiah son of Joseph” is much older. In some texts from around the turn of the era, we encounter Joseph as a son of God who atones for the sins of others with his suffering. For example, in Joseph and Aseneth, written between 100 B.C.E. and 115 C.E. Joseph is described as “son of God” (6:3, 5, 13:13). Joseph is also called “God’s firstborn son” (18:11, 21:4, 23:10).
In another book from the Second Temple period, The Testament of the Twelve Patriarchs, the Testament of Benjamin connects Joseph and the figure of the Suffering Servant in Isaiah 52–53. In this testament, Jacob says to Joseph:
“ ‘In you will be fulfilled the heavenly prophecy, which says that the spotless one will be defiled by lawless men and the sinless one will die for the sake of impious men’ ”
These citations suggest that the designation of the suffering Messiah as the “son of Joseph” goes back to sources from the Second Temple period.
In another late Midrash, Pesikta Rabbati, the Messiah Ephraim (a son of Joseph) is created. As to him, the sins of others “will bend you down under a yoke of iron.” The Holy One, blessed be he, asks him if he is willing to endure this suffering. Messiah Ephraim, son of Joseph, asks how long his suffering will last. Seven years, the Holy One replies. After more dialogue, the Messiah Ephraim says: “Master of the Universe, with joy in my soul and gladness in my heart I take this suffering upon myself, provided not one person in Israel perish; that not only those who are alive be saved in my days, but also those who are dead …”4
In this passage from the Pesikta Rabbati, the son of Joseph (here Ephraim) also appears as the Messiah identified as the Suffering Servant in Isaiah.
Knohl, continued
[T]he tradition of the Messiah son of Joseph who is killed
goes back to the late first century B.C.E. or the early first century C.E.
In “Gabriel’s Revelation,” the Lord addresses David, asking him to request of Ephraim that he place a sign: “My servant David, ask of Ephraim [that he p]lace the sign …” (Line 16–17). Unfortunately, the nature of the sign is not specified, but it seems to be the sign of salvation. However, the fact that David is sent by God to request Ephraim to place the sign may attest that Ephraim has superior rank. He, and not David, is the key person who is asked to place the sign; David is only the messenger!
“Ephraim” is the name of the Messiah in Pesikta Rabbati, when he is said to suffer in order to atone for Israel. Thus, in this new text on stone, we have the earliest reference to Ephraim as a messianic figure (although in Jeremiah 31:20, the Lord tells Ephraim: “Truly, Ephraim is a dear son to me” [see also Hosea 11:1–8]).
It is also interesting that this new text seems to predict that in three days the evil will be defeated by the righteous. They read as follows: “By three days you shall know that thus said the Lord of Hosts, the God of Israel, the evil has been broken by righteousness” (Lines 19–21).
There is more: Line 80 begins with the phrase “In three days.” This is followed by another word that the editors could not read. Then comes the phrase “I, Gabriel.” I believe that this “illegible” word is actually legible. It is the word ḥayeh, “live” (חאיה). Gabriel the archangel is giving orders to someone to “live”: “In three days, you shall live.” In other words, in three days, you shall return to life (be resurrected).
There follow two additional words that are also difficult to read. The letters are not easy to make out, but I believe the first word begins with a ג ( gimel ) and a ו (vav). The next word is equally difficult. The letter ל (lamed) is quite legible, and the letter before it seems to be an ע (‘ayin). I believe the sentence can be reconstructed as follows: “In three days, live, I, Gabriel, command you.” (Leshloshet yamin ḥayeh, ani Gavriel, gozer alekha.) Ada Yardeni has since agreed with this reading of ḥayeh and with the translation “In three days, live, I, Gabriel …”
Knohl, continued
The archangel is ordering someone to rise from the dead within three days.
In “Gabriel’s Revelation,” we see that another messiah—Ephraim, or the “Messiah son of Joseph”—was known already in the late first century B.C.E. The “Ephraim” of “Gabriel’s Revelation” was probably based on Biblical verses depicting him as the suffering Son of God (see Jeremiah 31:17–20; Hosea 11:1–8). And the setting of “Gabriel’s Revelation” reflects elements of death and bloodshed.
The messianic figure of David is traditionally represented as involving bravery, military skill and triumph. The figure of Ephraim, or the Messiah son of Joseph, symbolizes a very different and new kind of messianism. Ephraim is a messiah of suffering and death.
Knohl, continued
Jesus may well be seeking to dispel the prevalent expectation of a triumphal messiah, the traditional “son of David.”
His ideal messianic model is different. As with the Messiah Ephraim, son of Joseph, Jesus’ Messiah involves suffering and death.
The new inscription, “Gabriel’s Revelation,” suggests that this different kind of Messiah was evolving at the turn of the era—different from the Messiah son of David. Instead of a militant Messiah, it envisions a Messiah who suffered, died and rose. Jesus also understood the Messiah to be a Son of Joseph.
Like in “Gabriel’s Revelation,” also in the saying of Jesus, David is secondary to the other Messiah. In Nazareth, Jesus was known as the “son of Joseph” (Luke 4:22; John 6:42). Thus it is quite possible that Jesus identified himself as the Messiah “Ephraim,” the son of Joseph who is mentioned in “Gabriel’s Revelation.”
# # #
Israel Knohl is the author of
Messiahs and Resurrection in “The Gabriel Revelation”
(The Robert and Arlene Kogod Library of Judaic Studies)
Illustrated Edition, July 7, 2009
(Hardcover, $130.00)
I had no idea you guys were discussing this. MANY THANKS. Robert, I see you left me some reading where I had left off so I’m going to fetch that and will catch this thread up 1st thing tomorrow. I really appreciate this, especially as I haven’t come to this forum well-prepared. Cheers
The Original Post in This Thread
The Youtube Video: The Messiah Before Jesus
The YouTube Subscriber Posting the Video: Syndicado TV
Simcha Jacobovici
I Gabriel [command you] the Prince of Princes in three days: Live!
Steefen
The translation in the Biblical Archaeology Society review article
Line 79: from before of you the three signs three …
Line 80: In three days, live, I Gabriel command you,
Line 81: prince of the princes, the dung of the rocky crevices …
The Gabriel Revelation Stone predates the death and resurrection of the biblical Jesus. This is the important issue.
The video goes on to say Prince of Princes is a code word for Messiah.
The video goes on to say look in history for a Messiah/King who has died.
Personally, I think Simcha Jacobovichi does not meet my high standards for discussion/argumentation. This is not the first time I have looked at something he has put forth.
From Prince of Princes as code word for Messiah to “in three days, live” interpreted as a resurrection three days after dying, Simcha finds a messiah who is killed.
Turn to
Steefen
Judah of Galilee was not one of three in the Tax Revolt.
Judah/Judas of Galilee most likely is not the same person as Judas of Sepphoris, Galilee, son of Hezekias (arch/leading rebel).
There are two things:
1) The Judas-Simon-Athrongeus insurrection that resulted in 2,000 people being crucified | Wars of the Jews, Book 2, Chapter 4
where Judas of Sepphoris, Galilee, son of Hezekias is the Judas in Judas-Simon-Athrongeus.
= = =
Judas was in Galilee.
Simon was in Perea. His opponent was Valerius Gratus before Gratus became Roman prefect of Iudaea province.
Gratus chased down Simon, cut him, likely with his sword, struck him with his sword, breaking his neck.
Athrongeus was a shepherd who fought against the king’s party and the Romans. He caused trouble in Judea.
Ok I’ve read what you guys have been finding and haven’t read my dead sea scrolls, have heard of Knohl (and Tabor of course), and must read Robert’s paper. I’ve managed to put about 50 books together for my reading list–not sure I’ll continue w/ Bultmann. Rather, I’ll base my readings on Robert’s paper, this will be my jumping off point to give myself the needed overview of what’s been happening those 400 years.
I got a little excited to see your bold purple declaration, Steefen, that the tradition predated Jesus, but whatever turns up or doesn’t, this is a good start for me. It’s invigorating to see the knowledge here and I’m eager to begin in earnest. I should post my books list to see what’s good and what’s outdated or suspect. And my only search engines have been PDFdrive and archive.org. Think I’ll start on one of Bart’s books too, in tandem w/ another history and w/ Robert’s paper. That’ll give me 3 points to surround the Question.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)