It is almost certain that the Jews did expect a Messiah who could be
called the “Lamb of God.” All aspects in the Lamb of God texts are rooted in
the Jewish scripture, and it would unreasonable to believe the Jews were not aware
of them. The early Christians were themselves to believe the Jews were not
brought up with Jewish writings and traditions. When they accepted Jesus as
their Messiah, they did not leave the Jewish religion. Rather, this new
doctrine was merely added to their Jewish faith. It would be reasonable to
suggest John the Baptist considered Jesus as the fulfillment of the “Lamb of
God” spoken of in Jewish Scripture and tradition, particularly since he
belonged to a priestly family.
G. H. Dix suggests, concerning the Joseph blessing in T. Benj. 3:8,
there are only two predictions in the Old Testament that can be described as “the
heavenly prophecy which says that the blameless one should be defiled for
lawless men, the sinless one shall die for ungodly men.” (G. H. Dix, “Notes and
Studies: The Messiah Ben Joseph,” JTS 28 [1925-26]: 135) He continues:
The first of these is the four Songs of the Suffering Servant [Isa
52:13-53:12], and the second Zechariah xii 9 ff. (Although the interpretation
of this prophecy has been disputed, it is still of great importance since the
first Christians quoted it as a prediction of Jesus’ suffering and death, and
the Jewish rabbis used it as a prediction of the suffering Messiah ben Joseph)
Consequently this Jewish writing associates a descendant of Joseph with one, or
both of these passages. . . . He [the Suffering Servant] resembles Joseph in
that his undeserved sufferings bring salvation; but he is a transcendental
Joseph, made to be such by the influence of the Messiah ben Joseph theme, as
the testimony of the later Jewish rabbis also bears witness, since they
interpreted the prediction as referring to this suffering, dying Messiah of
ancient tradition. (54)
It is important, however, to note that the author of the T. Benj. 3:8
does not label this sinless, suffering, and dying Josephite as Messiah ben Joseph.
In fact, the Testament uses the title “Messiah” only for Levi and Judah. If the
author did not believe this Josephite was the Messiah, why did he make him “sinless”?
Dix suggests the following explanation:
There was a tradition already existing in some circles that the Songs
and the Zechariah prophecy indicated an individual, that this individual was to
be the Messiah ben Joseph, and that the writer of the Testament modified this
tradition slightly: because of his belief in a Messiah ben Levi, he could not
accept the hope of a Messiah ben Joseph, but he accepted as much of it as he
could, viz. that the Suffering Servant should be a ‘sinless’ Josephite who
should die on Israels’ behalf. (Ibid., 135-36)
In this context, it is interesting to recall the words Caiaphas spoke
in the Sanhedrin, when they were plotting to kill Jesus: “You know nothing at
all! You do not realize that it is better for you that one man die for the
people than that the whole nation perish” (John 11:49-50). The apostle John comments:
“He did not say this on his own. . . . He prophesied that Jesus would die for
the Jewish nation, and not only for that nation but also for the scattered
children of God, to bring them together and make them one” (John 11:51-52). Dix
emphasizes that Caiaphas was alluding to “a piece of knowledge which the
Council should have had in mind, but of which they were ignorant—some tradition
or writing: his words would be an adequate summary of the passage in T. Benjamin,
or of the tradition underlaying it, or to which it gave rise.” (Ibid.) (Jan
A. Sigvartsen, Messiah ben Joseph: A Type in both Jewish and Christian
Traditions [Glossahouse Studies in Texts & Languages Monograph Series
1; Wilmore, Ky.: GlossaHouse, 2018], 17-19)
