In fairness, someone countered our statement about many Orthodox Jews believing in two messiahs, and so we have posted the following comment and our response here:

CHALLENGE: "Actually you are incorrect. Jews do not believe in "two messiahs". we believe in The One Messiah, and we are still waiting. There are also no "rabbis" who decided there would somehow be "two messiahs".

RESPONSE from Andrew Gabriel Roth:

That 2000 years ago many Jews were generally expecting 2 Messiahs (ben Yoseph and ben David) is beyond dispute. Even back then however, there was significant debate on the matter as it particularly pertained to who Y'shua--a "candidate" for that office--would be (Matt 16). Is he Elijah or was that the baptist? Is he Jeremiah or one of the other prophets returned? Is he David in power and glory? All of these, and more, are reflected in the Gospel record.

As Pharisaism gave way to Rabbinic Judaism, these strands of Messianic belief continued well into the Renaissance. However, beginning in Germany about 200 years ago, what we now call Reform Judaism began to gain strength. And, we need to bear in mind that the majority of Jewry is Reform or Conservative--not Orthodox.

But I need to back step a bit. In the 17th century there were a number of "Messianic setbacks". The two most famous ones--Shabbatai Svi and Jacob Frankl, shamed their own people by being forced to convert to Islam and Catholicism respectively. This began kind of the Jewish equivalent of the "counter reformation". Just like the RCC raised up groups like the Jesuits to restore order and convince the masses that their way had always been the right one, so too did a bunch of rabbis arise determined to purge Jewish tradition of these embrassments. The revisionism took several forms.

1) Because Shabbatai Svi was a Kabbalist, mystical studies were strongly discouraged.

2) In spite of the rise of pro-mystical elements like Hasidim, mainline Orthodox steered clear of telling certain legends that stressed emotional connections to YHWH over study and Torah-Talmud observance.

3) Judaism as a whole became a more insular and ethno-centric religion, stressing the unique status of the chosen people. We can argue about how much of that was right or wrong, but the fact that it happened is beyond dispute.

So as the Orthodox became the "Jewish Jesuits", other Jews were inspired to do more radical change vis a vis the Conservative and Reform movements. In both cases, Reform-Conservatives and Protestants were the stronger degree of change that the established order tried to limit by reforming themselves in a more moderate fashion.

Now, from here we see a diverging away from literal Messiah ideology in all forms of Judaism. The Orthodox began to preach that Judaism didn't need a Messiah at all, and that living an ethical life is what mattered. Other Orthodox disagreed, though, and simply made the entire issue like Trinity is for the Christians: "It's a mystery, so don't even try to figure it out until YHWH gives an answer." It is to these groups of Judaism that I developed my own apologetics where I say, "YHWH is the Messiah, and the debate we have is HOW YHWH saves, not IF YHWH saves."

On the Reform-Conservative side, they also took the "YHWH is the Messiah/Judaism doesn't need a Messiah" argument on, but to another level. They began to look at the entire discussion as symbolism and allegory. Ironically, they delved more into the teaching of Rashi and Ibn Ezra than their Orthodox counterparts, for it was these men that proposed that Israel herself was the Messiah and therefore, the Jewish people are their own savior-mediator so long as they study Torah. The main divergence from the Orthodox, though, was the idea of a "Messianic Age" that didn't even need a Messiah but had the effects of a Messiah, anyway. Of all the arguments, this one to me was the most nonsensical of them all, to use an antonym to avoid a topic and act as if you dealt with it, anyway.

So, I would say that the point on The Refiner's Fire is accurate about what went on from Y'shua's day to about 400 years ago. Since that time, however, the person who challenged that idea is more accurate (a little too simplified but not wrong). Judaism, then and now, is a religion with relatively few branches but with a ton of diversity within each school, including a clear steering away from the entire Ben-Yosef, Ben-David argument.

One other thought I have on this, which is more of a question than a theory...

There seems to my mind to be a bit of double dealing going on in the counter missionary movement. They HAVE, to be sure, used the Ben Joseph/Ben David paradigm to attempt to discredit Y'shua, in the sense that they argued both Ben Joseph and Ben David should have come at the same time, and/or that if Y'shua was Ben Joseph, his Ben David counterpart should have been visible as well. The idea of one Messiah coming twice, once for each role, is totally foreign to Jewish thought.

But, on the other hand, if you asked the Tovia Singers of the world what they actually believed in, I think it wouldn't have anything to do with Ben Joseph-Ben David at all. It is simply a construct they use against the faith. It's a way of saying, "Look, Messiah had to fulfill these ancient expectations and this guy didn't do it". Then, once they win the day, they forget their own "evidence" and walk people down to a "Messianic Age Without a Messiah" viewpoint, or one of these other schools mentioned above....