Written by brother Falastineee
There is historical and textual evidence for the doctrine of dual messianism—the expectation of two distinct messianic figures in ancient Judaism during the Late Second Temple period. The sources that are used to make this claim is the Hebrew Bible, Dead Sea Scrolls, intertestamental literature, and New Testament references, I would argue that certain Jewish groups anticipated both:
* a Davidic (royal) messiah from the line of Judah, and
* a Priestly messiah from the line of Levi (often associated with Aaron and Zadok (Zadok son of Ahitub was a Levite priest during the time of King David. For a long time, he was co-high priest with Abiathar.) He was loyal to David to the very end, and annoited Solomon at the behest of Davids request instead of his other son, Abonijah. Abiathar who was the co-priest with Zadok sided with Abonijah and because of this, he lost his position as priest and Zadok became the sole priest administering the duties god commanded the levitical line.
Based on what Tabor has provided in his paper, “Two Messiahs”, he makes a great case that dual-messiah concept was not fringe, but had roots in Jewish covenant theology, priestly-kingly roles in ancient Israel, and sectarian writings from Qumran and the CD (the covenant of Damascus). Tabor discusses how this belief influenced early Christian thought, particularly interpretations of John the Baptist and Jesus. (I think I want to insert some references about the Paraclete being a person and not the Holy Spirit. There could be some ties with this.)
Who is James Tabor? Academic Background & Career
James D. Tabor is a prominent biblical scholar, archaeologist, and historian specializing in Christian origins and ancient Judaism:
* Ph.D., University of Chicago (1981) – specialized in New Testament and early Christian literature
* Faculty Positions:
* University of Notre Dame and College of William & Mary (late 1970s–1989)
* Professor (1989–2022) and Chair (2004–2014) of the Department of Religious Studies at UNC Charlotte
* Currently, a Distinguished Fellow in the Faculty of Humanities at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem
No way?! Two Messiahs?!
The biblical and historical precedents for dual leadership within Israel—kings from Judah and priests from Levi. Key passages (e.g., Malachi 2:8; Jeremiah 33:19–22; Zechariah 4 and 6) demonstrate how ancient texts hint at a divinely ordained joint rule. This priest-king rulership is seen in figures like David and Zadok, and idealized in Zechariah’s vision of the two “sons of fresh oil.” Zechariah 4:14 Shen ah yeem (two) Ben (sons) Yeets hawr (anointed)
The Qumran evidence, where texts like the Damascus Document and the Community Rule explicitly refer to a Messiah of Aaron and a Messiah of Israel. These documents suggest an organized belief in two distinct eschatological (study of end times) figures, often with the priestly messiah taking precedence. This is further supported by references in Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs, 4QFlorilegium, and 1QSa.
Tabor concludes the introductory section by noting that this idea may have influenced early Christian figures. For instance, John the Baptist could be interpreted as the expected priestly messiah, and Jesus as the Davidic king—together mirroring the Qumran model of dual messiahs.
Before we dive into key texts, what are the covenant of Damascus documents?
The Book of the Covenant of Damascus (the Zadokite Documents, a collection of writings from a Jewish sect, or the Damascus Document) is a work presenting the views of the sect which is said to have left the Land of Judah and emigrated to the Land of Damascus. The work first became known through the discovery by Solomon Schechter in 1896 of two fragmentary manuscripts of it (conventionally called A and B) in the genizah of a Karaite synagogue in Cairo. Schechter dated A to the 10th century C.E. and B to the 11th or 12th. They represent two different recensions of the work, to judge by the relatively small portions which overlap. When the Qumran texts were discovered in 1947 and the following years, an affinity between some of them and the Damascus Document was speedily recognized, and it soon became evident that the sect referred to in the Damascus Document must be identified with the Qumran community. This conclusion was confirmed with the discovery of fragments of the Damascus Document in the Qumran caves – fragments of seven manuscripts in Cave 4 and further fragments in Cave 6 (6QD). (https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/the-book-of-covenant-of-damascus)
Key DSS Texts Referencing Two Messiahs
1. Damascus Document (CD)
CD A Col. VII 18–21 - Covenant Damascus, Manuscript A, column 7, lines 18-21
“The star is the Interpreter of the Law... The scepter is the prince of the whole congregation...”
* The Interpreter of the Law is often equated with the priestly messiah; the scepter symbolizes the Davidic king(cf. Num 24:17).
CD A Col. XIV 18–19
"...until there arises the messiah of Aaron and Israel."
* Hebrew: mashiach ha-Aharon v'Yisrael
* Some take this as one figure; but linguistically and contextually it likely refers to two messiahs.
CD B Col. XIX 10–11
"...when there comes the messiah of Aaron and Israel..."
* Clear eschatological reference anticipating two figures.
CD B Col. XX 1
"...until there arises the messiah from Aaron and from Israel."
* Reinforces the two-lineage distinction.
2. Community Rule (1QS)
1QS Col. IX 10–11
"...until the prophet comes, and the messiahs of Aaron and Israel."
* The plural “messiahs” (משיחי) is unmistakable.
* Also introduces a third figure: "the prophet."
3. Rule of the Congregation (1QSa, or 1Q28a)
1QSa Col. II 11–22
Describes a communal meal where the priestly messiah blesses before the messiah of Israel.
* The priest has priority, mirroring texts like the Testament of Levi.
* Confirms the coexistence of two messianic leaders with distinct roles and hierarchy.
4. Florilegium (4Q174)
Interprets 2 Samuel 7:14 and predicts that the Branch of David (royal messiah) will arise with the Interpreter of the Law (priestly messiah).
5. War Scroll (1QM)
Mentions both a High Priest (likely the messiah of Aaron) and a Prince of the Congregation (likely the Davidic messiah).
* 4Q285 (fragment of War Scroll): refers to the Branch of David, again tying military leadership to Davidic identity.
6. Testimonia (4Q175)
* Chains together texts on:
* A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18)
* A Davidic ruler (Num 24)
* A Levitical blessing (Deut 33)
* Implies three eschatological figures: prophet, king, and priest.
7. Messianic Apocalypse (4Q521)
Uses Isaiah 61 language to describe the acts of a coming messiah.
* Doesn't explicitly name two messiahs, but some scholars think it assumes the Isaiah 61-style herald (priest) and a Davidic liberator.
8. Zadokite Texts (e.g., 4Q254, 4Q161)
* Reference Zechariah 4:14 (“two sons of fresh oil”)—interpreted as two anointed ones, standing before God.
* Seen as a symbolic basis for dual messianism.
9. Melchizedek Scroll (11Q13 or 11QMelch)
* Introduces Melchizedek as an exalted priestly redeemer with divine titles.
* Paired with a messenger figure (from Isaiah 52:7 and 61), likely implying a two-figure scheme.
Connecting it to the New Testament based on the roles of john and jesus!
John the Baptist as the Messianic Priest (Messiah of Aaron)
1. Malachi 3:1 (quoted in NT)
* NT Reference: John the Baptist identifies himself as the “messenger” preparing the way (cf. Mark 1:2–3, Matthew 11:10, Luke 7:27).
* Argument: John plays the role of the messenger of the covenant, which Qumran interpreted as a priestly figure.
* Connection: In the Qumran version of Malachi, this “messenger” and “Lord” are two separate figures—mirroring the idea of two messiahs.
2. Q Sayings – Luke 3:16–17 / Matthew 3:11–12
* John the Baptist says: “I baptize you with water... but one is coming who is more powerful than I.”
* Interpretation: John expects another messianic figure to follow him—possibly Jesus as the Davidic king.
3. Luke 7:18–20 (also Matthew 11:2–3)
* John sends disciples to ask Jesus: “Are you the one who is to come, or shall we look for another?”
* Implication: Even John is uncertain if Jesus is the only expected figure—possibly reflecting an expectation of two.
4. Luke 7:28 // Matthew 11:11
* Jesus says of John: “Among those born of women, no one is greater than John.”
* Tabor's argument: This is unqualified praise, especially in the Shem-Tob Hebrew Matthew, and may imply John had an unparalleled role—like the priestly messiah who “atones for the sons of his generation” (cf. 4Q541).
Jesus and John: A Joint Messianic Campaign
5. John 3:22–23 “Jesus and his disciples went out... and were baptizing. John also was baptizing...”
* Interpretation: The parallel ministry of John (priestly) and Jesus (Davidic) reflects the Qumran pattern of collaborative messianic leadership.
Key Bible Passages Indicating a Shift from the Levitical Covenant.
1. Hebrews 7:11–12
"If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood... why was there still need for another priest to come—one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron? For when the priesthood is changed, the law must be changed also."
* Interpretation: The Levitical priesthood was inadequate for bringing perfection. A change in priesthood (from Levi to Melchizedek/Jesus) implies a change in covenantal law.
2. Hebrews 8:6–7, 13
"But now Jesus has obtained a more excellent ministry... For if that first covenant had been faultless, there would have been no occasion for a second... By calling this covenant ‘new,’ he has made the first one obsolete."
* Interpretation: The new covenant, prophesied in Jeremiah 31, replaces the Mosaic covenant (which includes the Levitical priesthood).
* Obsolete does not necessarily mean bad, but surpassed.
3. Hebrews 10:1–10
"The law is only a shadow of the good things that are coming—not the realities themselves... It is impossible for the blood of bulls and goats to take away sins... Then he said, ‘Here I am, I have come to do your will.’ He sets aside the first to establish the second."
* Interpretation: The Levitical sacrifices are viewed as shadows, not final solutions. Jesus’ sacrifice "sets aside"the old system.
4. Jeremiah 31:31–34 (quoted in Hebrews 8 and 10)
“The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah... not like the covenant I made with their ancestors.”
* Relevance: Although Jeremiah doesn’t explicitly mention Levi, Hebrews interprets this as a replacement of the Mosaic-Levitical covenant with a new, internalized law mediated by Jesus.
5. Galatians 3:24–25
"So the law was our guardian until Christ came... Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian."
* Interpretation: Paul sees the Mosaic law, which includes the Levitical system, as a temporary guardian, now superseded by faith in Christ.
Important distinction that needs to be made
* The Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) treats the Levitical covenant as eternal (e.g., Numbers 25:13, Jeremiah 33:17–22).
* The New Testament, particularly Hebrews, reinterprets this through the lens of Jesus’ priesthood, implying that the function of the Levitical covenant has ceased, not because it was false, but because it was preparatory.
Some things the reader should consider and think about.
Would the disciples have known jesus was the final sacrifice?
Acts 21: showcases the council having Paul participate in the Nazareth vow, which included a sacrifice. This would nullify any references that Hebrews makes.
The writer of Hebrews fleshes out that Jesus nullified the covenant of Levi by becoming both the priest and king. Although there are some supposed allusions of this in the New Testament (e.g. Revelations 1:12-13, Romans 8:34, 1 John 2:1-2, Revelations 1:5-6, All of John 17, Matthew 26:28, Mark 14:24, and finally Luke 22:20), they never flat out make clear statements like the writer of Hebrews does to his audience. Further showcasing that this was intentional for these “Jewish Christian’s” and to close the loop and the two promised covenants between Levi and Judah.
How does islam come into play?
Duet 18, Isaiah 42, Isaiah 29, Matthew 22 (parable of the feast), John 4 (the Samaritan being told Jerusalem will not be a place of worship anymore). God warns the chosen people that if they do not obey him, the scepter will be taken away and that it will be given to others worthy (Genesis 49:10 - Shiloh possibly?) of it. Shiloh cannot be the messiah because he himself refers to being the messiah in John 4. Yet, the authority or baton, was passed on to the final prophet, Muhammed ﷺ due to the disobedience the children of Israel.
