David C. Mitchell, «The Fourth Deliverer: A Josephite Messiah in 4QTestimonia», Vol. 86 (2005) 545-553
Commentators recognize a tri-polar messianism in 4Q175, based on the first three
sections of the text. But the last section suggests that the text is in fact tetramessianic,
featuring an eschatological Joshua. This is confirmed by similarities
between 4Q175, the tetra-messianic "Four Craftsmen" baraitha, and Targ. Ps.-J.
to Exod. 40,9-11; as well as by evidence that Joshua was a messianic type in postbiblical
Judaism.
The Fourth Deliverer 547
just its first three-quarters. But for some reason this has not been suggested (9).
Nonetheless I propose that to interpret the fourth testimony in a manner
consistent with the first three is eminently reasonable and produces a quite
acceptable result, that is, an eschatological Joshua. This figure, like biblical
Joshua, would be a warlike conqueror and trace his descent from Joseph and
Ephraim. We might rightly call him War Messiah ben Ephraim ben Joseph.
Three further pieces of evidence may confirm this proposal: (i) the ‘Four
Craftsmen’ baraitha of rabbinic literature; (ii) the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan
to Exod 40,9-11; and (iii) messianic Joshua traditions.
2. Four Craftsmen
The ‘Four Craftsmen’ tradition on Zech 2,3 appears in seven texts in two
major variants. The earliest variant appears in Pesiqta Rabbati 15.14-15,
Pesiqta deRav Kahana 5.9, and Song Rabbah 2.13.4, and is attributed to
tannaitic period teachers (10). Here is PesR 15.14-15.
The flowers appear on the earth (Song 2.12). R. Isaac said, “It is
written: And the Lord showed me four craftsmen (Zech 2.3). These are
they: Elijah, the King Messiah, Melchizedek and the War Messiah.â€
A second variant, attributed to later authorities, appears in Suk 52b, Seder
Eliyahu Rabbah 96, and Yalqut Shim¿oni on Zech 1,20 (568) (11). Here is the
Bavli version.
And the Lord showed me four craftsmen (Zech 2.3). Who are these
four craftsmen? Rav H≥ana bar Bizna said in the name of Rav Shimon
H˘asida: “Messiah ben David, Messiah ben Joseph, Elijah, and the
Righteous Priest.â€
(9) This may be due to the widespread view that Messiah ben Joseph is a late idea,
developing out of Bar Kokhba’s defeat in 135 CE. See e.g., J. HAMBURGER,
Realenzyklopädie des Judentums (Strelitz i. M. 1874) II, 768; J. LEVY, “Mashiah≥â€,
Neuhebräisches und chaldäisches Wörterbuch (Leipzig 1876/1889) III, 270-272; A.
EDERSHEIM, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (s.l. 1883) 79, n.1, 434-435; J.
KLAUSNER, The Messianic Idea in Israel (London 1956) 487-492; S. HURWITZ, Die Gestalt
des sterbenden Messias (Zürich – Stuttgart 1958) 178-180; VERMES, Jesus the Jew, 139-
140. In “Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis Differ: Messiah ben Joseph in the Babylonian
Talmudâ€, Review of Rabbinic Judaism 8 (2005) 77-90, I have tried to show that this idea is
mistaken and present the case for ben Joseph being fully developed by the mid-first century
CE. J. Heinemann has suggested that an existing militant Ephraim Messiah became a dying
messiah by analogy with Bar Kokhba (“The Messiah of Ephraim and the Premature Exodus
of the Tribe of Ephraimâ€, HTR 68 [1975] 1-15). Although such a view is not at odds with
my conclusion in this paper, I feel it is not supported by evidence elsewhere.
(10) PesK also attributes it to the fourth generation tanna R. Isaac (fl. 140-165) in the
editions of Buber (S. BUBER, Pesiqta de-Rav Kahana [Lyck 1868]) and Braude (R. Kahana’s
Compilation of Discourses for Sabbaths and Festal Days [ed. W.G. BRAUDE – I.J. KAPSTEIN]
[Philadelphia 1975]), but A.K. Wünsche (Bibliotheca Rabbinica [Leipzig 1885] III, 61)
gives the second generation tanna ‘R. Eleasar’ (fl. 80-120). I have been unable to verify his
Hebrew original. CantR 2.13.4 attributes it to R. Berekiah in the name of R. Isaac.
(11) Suk 52b and the Yalq attribute it to R. H˘ana bar Bizna in the name of R. Shimon
H˘asida, a little-known figure, probably of the late tannaitic period (Hag 13b-14a; S.
FRIEMAN, Who’s Who in the Talmud [Northvale, NJ 1995] 291; Soncino Talmud, 722),
whose teachings are known mainly through his third century disciple R. H˘ana (FRIEMAN,
Who’s Who, 84). SER gives no authority for the tradition.