Lion and Lamb (Part 1)
There are two images of the Messiah throughout the Law and the Prophets. One is a suffering servant; the other is conquering king. The Rabbis called these two figures messiah son of Joseph and messiah son of David. The idea was that Joseph suffered at the hands of his brothers in an Egyptian jail. The figure of David was a king ruling in the height of power.
However, that distinction is incorrect in the fact that both Joseph and David suffered, and both Joseph and David ruled. (On the other hand, there is a correct hidden meaning in that comparison, in which Joseph rules among the Gentiles, and David ruled within Israel. The Messiah must rule as both head of the international Church and as king of Judah/Israel.)
How did the Rabbis try to solve this paradox of the Messiah as suffering servant or conquering king? Some considered this to be two different messiahs. Some considered this as two options. (If the people were righteous, Messiah would come as conqueror; if the people were sinful, Messiah would come to suffer.)
We find the solution in the Gospels: The Messiah has to come first to suffer and die; and then He will come later to conquer and rule. That pattern of suffering first and then ruling can be found in many different places through the Law and Prophets.
He is Both
David suffered at the hands of Saul; then ruled in Jerusalem.