New Testament ruse: The many faces of James
James is “Judas” throughout the canon. James is “Lazarus” throughout the canon. James is “Judas” in the Gospel of Judas.
Many Bible researchers have noted that James the “brother” of Jesus is strangely minimized in the New Testament. It turns out, that for whatever reason, he actually does appear, but in many alias characters in what appears to be a persistent effort to eliminate his prominence as the preeminent religious leader of his time. In the earliest record of the time, Paul’s epistles, the historical Jesus is non-existent in favor of a supernatural redeemer figure, and James is relegated to a nearly non-existent bystander role, which we know from historical sources is not the case. The gospel writers in their pseudo-histories of the early first century, presumably starting with Mark, were determined to continue this ruse, or more likely, were ordered to by first or second century church leaders in an effort to eliminate any trace of Masters besides “Jesus”. Many different figures appear in the narrative with telltale similarities to details of the historic James. A working knowledge of what a mystic Master such as John the Baptist, “Jesus” or James does is helpful to spotting the clues as to who is who and who is doing what in the gospels. In many passages the entire biblical scenario is overlay to the mystic message being hidden beneath it. For more background information look into the Radha Soami Satsang Beas literature available at http://www.RSSB.org. Here is the case:
The role of James in the gospels is hidden by a series of misconstrued assumptions, mistranslations, and misinterpretations.
The Gospel of Judas misconstrued
In the Gospel of Judas, Jesus tells Judas that “You will exceed them all, for you will sacrifice the man that bears me” – 56:20. This follows line 36:1, where Jesus tells him, “someone else will replace you”. Both of the other two readable books in the Codex Tchacos have similar statements about the protagonists, Philip and James, who are told, “you will die” and “you will no longer be James”, respectively (“Letter of Peter to Philip”, 7:6, and “James”, 13:25). He “will come to rule over them” (Gospel of Judas, 46:23), Jesus tells Judas, about the “other generations”, meaning the souls that he will save. But he also tells him, “No person of mortal birth is worthy to enter the house you have seen, for it is reserved for the holy” – 45:14-19. Judas must give up his mortal self before going there. In the Gospel of Judas, it is Judas who is the sacrifice, not Jesus: “you [Judas] will sacrifice the man [himself] that bears me [Jesus as Word or Holy Spirit]”. In all church histories, James is the one to take the reins from Jesus. In the Habakkuk Pesher, found among The Dead Sea Scrolls, the Righteous Teacher who is forced from Jerusalem to Qumran is James (Acts 21:28), as Dr. Robert Eisenman has shown1. James is the successor to Jesus. In the First Apocalypse of James, James kisses Jesus as a symbol of the spirit transferred between Masters (31:5). James will be the one through whom others will now “open the good Door” (Second Apocalypse of James, 55:10), and be saved. Judas dreams that the other disciples “stoned” him in the Gospel of Judas. James was stoned to death (Hegesippus, via Eusebius). He becomes successor Master to Jesus in these three gnostic books, and is shown in the details of the canonical Betrayal scenario in all four gospels of the New Testament, as well, to be Jesus’ successor Master. “Betray him” is really “deliver” him, as that’s the proper word choice for the relevant conjugation of “paradidomai”, not the received, pejorative, “betray” — the only time this common word usage is rendered “betray” in the NT, instead of “hand over” or “deliver”. The “woe” to “that man who betrays me” in Matthew 26:24 and Mark 14:21 is really “woe to that man [the new Master] who delivers me [the Spirit] “. The origin of the switch to “betray” could be connected to a clever twist of the spoken words of the Master, Jesus, into a word that meant something almost precisely opposite that of the oral tradition. The ‘Deliverer’ as the Holy Spirit comes to the disciples in spirit in their meditation (“Watch with me one hour”, “Watch and pray” in the Gethsemane scene), and to the predecessor, Jesus, to “deliver” him from his duties as Master. This was evidently an opportunity too appealing to let go by for the gospel writers (Mark, at least, subsequently adopted by the others). The concept of a betrayed leader led to his execution was thus born.
1Robert Eisenman, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the First Christians”, ch. 9, p. 332ff
This nearly replicates word for word the same statement found, in the same setting, as Judas is told by Jesus in the Gospel of Judas “You will exceed them all, for you will sacrifice [the woe] the man that bears [delivers, not ‘betrays’ in the canon] me.” And, it follows the bizarre discussion in Luke (22:24) about which one of the disciples would be the greatest. (This in relation to: Gospel of Judas, “you will exceed them all”). James makes his entrance as Master-to-be in Mark 14:43, right after Jesus says, “Rise up [within]! Let’s go! My betrayer [Deliverer] is at hand” — probably a double meaning here, spirit and successor, as “Judas” next shows up with clubs and soldiers. The “kiss” is the transfer of Spirit in the First Apocalypse of James. It is not desired, as no one wants to be a Master. It is a huge burden, even if you are ‘God’. “And they laid hands on him and seized him”, verse 14:46, is spiritual: They “laid hands on” James spiritually, as in trying to partake of his spirit. In 14:49, three lines later, Jesus chastises them for not “seizing” him “in the Temple [their bodies] where he was “teaching” (appearing in spirit). The seizing of the young man two lines later is a repeat of this scenario “And a young man followed him”(14:51). This is not ‘followed Jesus’ like a puppy, but ‘followed’ Jesus as the new Master. He fled “naked” (up, in spirit), again, not desiring to be Master, leaving behind the “mantle” of his Mastership, the linen cloth of a Nazirite Priest, or, alternatively “sindon” could mean ‘grave clothes’ which symbolize the body of James, left behind as he rises within. “And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself”, John 12:32, is not about what it is commonly assumed to be about– the crucifixion — but is this ‘rising up’ in spirit, within oneself, in meditation. “All men” is a generic reference to all his disciples, not to everyone who will ever live and accept deliverance from the savior in the future.2
2Maharaj Charan Singh, “Light on St. John”, p. 182.
The “large upper room” that the disciples are told will be made ready for them in Luke 22:12 is the heavens, or inner regions where the Father is waiting for them (aeons in Gospel of Judas). They are to follow the “Water-bearer” (22:10) symbol for Aquarius, the new Age they are to enter after the Piscean Age which Jesus personified. “And they went and found it as he had told them, and they prepared the passover” (22:13). Now the stage is set for the Last Supper and the “Betrayal”. Jesus breaks bread, and passes the cup around to the disciples. But, in the Gospel According to the Hebrews, the bread is given not to the disciples, but to JAMES. Mark and Matthew have Judas “dipping” with Jesus. And also in Gospel of the Hebrews is James “not eating” (and presumably not drinking) until he has ‘seen’ Jesus or “the Son of man risen from among those that sleep”.3 Mark 14:25 and Matthew 26:29 are pulled from the same forge: “I tell you I shall not drink again of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.” This is James, not Jesus, who is abstaining “until” something momentous happens in heaven in this early ‘Gospel of the Hebrews’, perhaps the prototype for Matthew. And so begins the many connections of the “betrayal of Jesus” with the figure of James.
3Eisenman, “James the Brother of Jesus”, ch. 26, p. 956-7.
Zechariah 13 mistranslated
Always remember: In most ancient Hebrew manuscripts, as in Greek, punctuation and capitalization is discretionary — determined by context and the skill of the translator — and even word spacing is often missing. Zechariah 13:7 is mistranslated at Mark 14:26, Matthew 26:31, and in Zechariah in all received versions, even in the pre-Christian Septuagint, as the sword striking THE SHEPHERD. It is not. The “sword” is the Spirit within the Master (13:7a): “Arise, O sword of my Shepherd, within the man who is my companion, says the Lord of hosts.” (Luke has two swords at 22:38: one for each Master, Jesus and James.) It “strikes” the disciples (13:7b): “Strike, O Shepherd, that the sheep [devotees] may be troubled” or (lit.) “… broken to pieces, shattered [inside in meditation]”, not “scattered”. The Lord “returns”, or “replaces”, his hand “upon” the little ones (the disciples) as they become one with Him through the Shepherd-Master in 13:9, calling on his “Name” — so much more beautiful and poetically correct than “Strike the Shepherd … .” Two-thirds of the people, the ones who don’t care to follow the Shepherd, are cut off and perish unsaved (13:8), and the third that is to be saved (“left alive” in spirit) are to be refined as in fire (13:9): “They will call on my Name and I will answer them.” This ‘calling’ is calling on the Word, or Logos — the “Apophasis” Word or Logos that is the Master’s true form. Luke 21:12-19 has Jesus warning the disciples of the persecution they will have to endure: “But before all this they will lay their hands on you and persecute you” (v 12); but “not a hair of your head will perish” (v 18); “By your endurance you will gain your lives” (v 19). Compare with, “Tomorrow they will torment the one who bears me. Truly I say to you [pl.], no hand of a mortal human will sin against me” (Gospel of Judas p. 56:3-4, fragment). This isn’t Jesus being persecuted in the Gospel of Judas, but the disciples: “Jesus said, Truly I say to you , ‘This baptism will spare YOU from the evils of the ruler of this world, which will destroy the entire generation of the earthly man Adam'” (56:1-2 fragment) — spare them, not Jesus. “They”, the authorities, will torment the disciples, not Jesus. Now read the two statements in order: “This baptism will spare you from the evils of the ruler of this world. Tomorrow they will torment the one who bears me. Truly I say to you, ‘No hand of a mortal human will sin against me.'” He isn’t talking about himself. He would not have switched subjects so casually from them (“spare you”) to him (Jesus as “the one who bears me”). He is telling them what their baptism will do for them. “The one who bears me” is therefore, the disciples, spoken generically (“the one who”). Masters are not self-concerned — ever. (This author has personally known two of them.)
This passage, chapters 10 through 13 of Zechariah, one of the most beautiful passages ever written by the hand of man, is completely misconstrued. The story of the replacing of the bad shepherds (the worldly priests) by “the one I [the Lord] am raising up”, Zechariah 11:16, is all wrong in all received versions. It is clear that the shepherd the Lord is raising up — even the Lord “becoming” shepherd of the flock “doomed to slaughter” — is doing something good to His sheep, even if the language is apocalyptic. All extent versions of the passage are based on the Masoretic text, which follows Christian-era doctrine of sacrificial salvation. The original intent of the pericope is to illustrate the working of the Lord through His chosen vessel, the ‘good Shepherd’ or Master, which must resolve the passage — and does — in the final verses, 7 through 9. He is replacing the bad shepherds who are neglecting the sheep. How neglecting? By not attending to their true needs, which is to guide the sheep to relinquish their lower natures — becoming “refined” as by “fire” (13:9). These chosen third will be put into THE FIRE. This is a good thing!!! This new shepherd is God Himself, in his Shepherd — the Master. He personally replaces the bad shepherd priests who are to be “punished” by His hot anger (10:3). Beginning with Zechariah 13:6, “And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds on your back?’ he will say, ‘The wounds I received in the house of my friends’ ” (ESV) we see things get off to a bad start. The Hebrew is “yad [hands, pl.] bayin [between]”: “wounds between the hands”, as Hebrew expert commentaries on this correctly say, not ‘on your back’, or “in your side’, or ‘on your hands’, or any of the other dozen mistranslations you will find in the receiveds. It only goes downhill from there in 13:7:
“Awake, O sword against my shepherd,
against the man who stands next to me”
says the Lord of hosts.
Strike the shepherd,
that the sheep may be scattered,
I will turn my hand against the little ones.”
This couldn’t be more wrong. First of all, the consensus assumption is that the Lord wields the sword, although it is never so stated. Then, there is a subject/verb mismatch. The verb “Awake” in 7a is in the feminine gender, and matches the feminine gender “sword”. “Strike” in 7b is masculine and doesn’t match the understood subject, “sword” from 7a. Commentators have argued that this is a special case, as is Genesis 4:7, with the personification of “sin crouching at the door” as a masculine “beast” (Keil and Delitzsch). The understood subject, “sword”, supposedly changes to masculine when personified to accommodate being the subject for the the masculine verb, “Strike”. But this is special pleading, as the subject which is supposedly personified to the required masculine gender in 7b (“O sword”) is left feminine in 7a, while it is equally personalized in, “Awake, O sword”. And, the context clearly shows otherwise: The Shepherd is performing an action that the Lord says will lead to one third being left alive (in spirit) and “refined” in fire, to, at the conclusion of the pericope, be made his own! Brown-Driver-Briggs has the key here. In their Hebrew lexicon, page 85, the accusative article “et”, most normally used for a direct object, has a variant usage as: “3. Chiefly in an inferior or later style, “et” is used irregularly, partly, as it would seem, to give greater definiteness at the mention of a new subject …” (italics added). We have a sword arising, and its owner, the Shepherd, striking with it. The “wounds” are received in the House of the Beloved, wounds made by this sword of the Shepherd, and the refining “by fire” follows, leading to the sheep being fit to become the Lord’s people.
It would not fit for THE SHEPHERD to be the one being “struck”. The context is that the sheep are struck, or ‘”refined” and “tested” — “alive” (13:8) — as metals are refined and tested, removing impurities by the striking of the Shepherd’s sword of the Word. (Shepherd is capitalized, as the Lord’s Shepherd). The Hebrew “al” is better rendered here as “of” and “within”, not “against”, as this is the good shepherd (of the Lord — “my Shepherd”), not one of the bad shepherds, and is doing work with, or within, the beloved sheep. The Shepherd that the Lord is “raising up” does not “care for the perishing, or the seek the wandering, or heal the maimed, or nourish the sound, but devours the flesh of the fat ones, tearing off even their hoofs” (11:16). The former are the disinterested, unsaved, ‘bad’ sheep; the latter, the “fat ones”, are the chosen ‘good’ sheep. No one unfamiliar with what it is that a true Master does will ever understand this. It is a very deep mystic truth. The Master is caring for his own in the best way possible: he will DESTROY them utterly, so that he can replace them (“he who loses his life for my sake will find it”, Matt. 10:39, and “someone else will replace you” – Gospel of Judas 36:1). Amos, like whole chunks of the Old Testament, is about divine elimination: “Woe to you who desire the day of the Lord” – Amos 5:18. “All the sinners of my people shall die by the sword, who say ‘Evil shall not overtake or meet us.’ In that day I will raise up the booth of David that is fallen and repair its breaches …” – Amos 9:10-11a. Its meaning is that those who are chosen — not those that are forsaken — will be transformed by the Holy Spirit, or the “booth of David”. Zechariah 12:10, commonly thought to be a reference to the killing of the Messiah, “they will look on Me whom they have pierced”, is wrong — a misreading of the Hebrew “asher”, “whom”. It is “who”, not “whom” — they will look on Me [within themselves], [the one] who has pierced them”! The Messiah, the Spirit, who works within the disciples, is “piercing” them, to effect the transformation of God-realization. The real reading of this passage is this:
“And if one asks him, ‘What are these wounds between your hands [placed on the head, over closed eyes, in meditation]?’ he will say, the wounds I received in the House of my Beloved [the Lord’s Abode in Heaven].’ ”
“Arise, O sword of my Shepherd,
within the man who is my beloved companion,”
says the Lord of hosts.
“Strike, O Shepherd,
that the sheep may be shattered;
I will return my hand upon the little ones.
In the whole Land, says the Lord,
two thirds shall be cut off and perish,
and one third shall be left alive.
And I will put this third into the fire,
and refine them as one refines silver,
and test them as gold is tested.
They will call on my name,
and I will answer them.
I will say, ‘They are my people’;
and they will say, ‘The Lord is my God’.’ ” – Zechariah 13:6-9
Now the verse grouping makes sense, and its beauty is restored. The Christianizing is now gone. One needs only look back two chapters to Zechariah 11:1-3 to see that the correct reading here is “Strike, O Shepherd”. In Zechariah 11:1-2, the failed priesthood is lamented, “Open your doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour your cedars. Wail, O cypress, for the cedar has fallen.” The dynamic of repeated poetic pairing brackets the good Shepherd/bad shepherds pericope of Zechariah 10 through 13. This poetic device of “parallel symmetry” is perhaps the most common poetry style in the Bible: building a passage around parallel lines, “saying the same thing twice”, or nearly the same thing, we might call it. Verses 11:1-2 comprise the “bad shepherd” first half. The second half, 13:7, is the “good” Shepherd that is raised up by the Lord Himself in 11:16, and the one who refines the little ones in 13:9 so that they are fit to “become my people”. Numbers 24 with the oracle of Balaam, whose eye is opened (the all-seeing mystic third eye!) in 24:3 leads up to an example of this pairing, two lines later in 24:5, “how fair are you tents, O Jacob, your encampments, O Israel!” Another is Isaiah 1:2: “Hear, O heavens, and listen, O earth;”. Poetic sensibility, as well as correct theology, demands that here in Zechariah 13 the “Shepherd” pericope resolve itself with “Arise, O sword …. Strike, O Shepherd”, not the misfit fantasy of the received, “Awake, O sword …; Strike the shepherd”. As Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, biblical language specialist, says, “like all poetry, the point is not to just convey information, but to sound well. The function of words, in this case, is to form poetry.”4 The point of translation isn’t to mimic the words of another language, but to relate the true sense of the whole passage, including its setting — which in this case is decidedly poetic. The whole Bible suffers from such gross translational misunderstanding. An entirely new mystic translation of all scripture is necessary.
4Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, “And God Said”, page 93.
The Garden of Gethsemane “betrayal” by Judas (Matthew 26:31-56) is an overwrite of James becoming Master as Jesus finishes up trying to get his disciples one last time to go within in their meditation (“WATCH and pray with me [for an hour]” — that is a description of the time of meditation). Jesus, too, is greatly troubled, “Let this cup pass from me” — not for himself, but for them — because he knows that he must leave them. Again, Masters never think of themselves. The Son of man is “betrayed” (delivered) into the hands of sinners (the disciples!) who are asleep: “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak [sleepy, not ‘depraved’ or in opposition to flesh]”. Jesus “comes” (within, in spirit, in their meditation) three times, and Peter “denies” him three times (26:34). The Greek here is “aparneomai”: not simple denial, but “strong denial”, “utter repudiation”, or “ignore”. The disciples rebuff the appearance of Jesus within themselves in their meditation. Just as with the “walking on water” miracle in which Peter doubts himself as Jesus “came to them” on the water of the spirit, this meditation is done early in the morning, before sunrise — the Fourth Watch (Matthew 14:25). Jesus intended to “pass them by”, or ignore them, but is won over by their steadfastness in meditation and comes to them “across the water” of Spirit. “Behold the hour is at hand. Rise up [within]! Let’s go! My Deliverer is at hand!” (Matthew 26:46) he tells the sleepy disciples. This is all spiritual allegory, and “Judas” was James, coming to relieve him as Master. Matthew 26:38, Mark 14:34: “My soul is very sorrowful, even unto death; remain here and watch” is from Isaiah 53:12, which is again borrowed for 14:41, “and [he] was numbered with the transgressors”. It isn’t Jesus concerned about himself, but about his disciples’ welfare after he leaves them. Hebrews 5:7-8, referring to this lamentation, is Pauline disinformation regarding this passage. It isn’t about Jesus fearing anything, but instead him worrying about the welfare of his disciples. Judas is then “numbered with the transgressors” (“us” in Acts 1:17), as the Son of man (the Spirit) is delivered into the hands of the other sleepy “sinners”, then, tellingly, again in Acts 1:17, he is “allotted his share in this ministry” — as successor.
In John 13, the foot washing is expressly intended by Jesus to prepare the disciples to accept his successor. He lectures on the servant being not greater than his master, and THE ONE SENT not being greater than the one sending him (13:16). “If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them. I am not speaking of you all; I know whom I have chosen [as successor! — this is still a positive reference!]” (13:17-18). John 13:18, “He who shares my bread has lifted up his heel against me”, drawn from Psalm 41:9 seems to be an anomaly in the middle of a positive passage (13:15-16, “I have given you an example”, “a servant is not greater than his Master”, 13:20-21, “he who receives me” and “one of you will deliver me”) about who the chosen one will be, “I tell you this now before it comes to pass, that when it does come to pass, you will believe that I am he” -John 13:19 (KJV, RSV). Jesus means here that he IS the successor! Just as “I and my Father are one”, the Master and the successor are one. “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who receives anyone I send receives him who sent me; and he who receives me receives him who sent me” (13:20). He immediately follows this with: “Truly, truly, I say to you, one of you will DELIVER me.” (13:21b). The first half of this verse is, “When Jesus had thus spoken, he was troubled in spirit and testified …”. That’s balderdash. Jesus was ecstatic! He was about to be released from the labors of his ministry. Jesus is telling the disciples to watch for his successor, not “the betrayer”, in whom they will find him. The Philips Modern English translation for the “I am he” of John 13:19 has, “I am what I claim I am”; and the NEB has “I am what I am”; the ISV, simply “I am”, the NLT, “the Messiah”; the NIV, ASV, and Weymouth have “He” capitalized; the God’s Word has “the one”; and the Aramaic Bible, “Living God” — all for the Greek “eimi” which is “he”, “Judas” (JAMES, of course) — not Jesus, not God. This is reckless editorializing by ignorant scholars — shameless orthodox corruption of scripture of the most egregious kind! John probably knew what the quote was as he said simply “eimi”, but nine out of twenty translations checked were wrong, not using the correct “he”, but something more autobiographical — nearly 50%! Interestingly, the most recently made translations were the most far off. After a few more centuries of this, who knows what the Bible might say!
Psalm 41 misinterpreted
Beyond “paradidomai”, the “lifting his heel against me” of verse 18 is apparently mistranslation or a misunderstanding of a Hebrew idiom by gospel authors, or both. This Psalm 41 excerpt is evidently quote-mining of the scriptures to support the orthodox position of one lone savior, so out of place is it in this passage, using the literal Hebrew. In a similar vein to Zechariah 13:7, this second supposed Betrayal-sequence prophesy of the coming sacrificial Messiah goes down in flames upon closer examination. The idiomatic Douay-Rheims version, alone among all translation versions: “For even the man of peace, in whom I trusted, who ate my bread, hath greatly supplanted me”, in place of “lifted his heel against me”, is exactly the dynamic of replacement indicated here by mystic exegesis, so perhaps that is the understanding Jesus had of the Psalm passage he quoted. Psalm 41:8, “They were meditating on a word of evil…”, in the Aramaic Bible in Plain English, points the way, for “dabar” is Hebrew for “word”. This is, “An evil thought [as ‘word’] has set upon him, that he will not rise up from his slumber”, with “sleep” the literal word for “kab” or the received “lie”. The speaker is “sleeping” or “slumbering” in meditation [see “asleep but not asleep, awake but not awake”, Hebrew Matthew 17:3], and will not rise up because of the wayward thoughts of his mind. Then, 41:9, “Moreover [Heb., ‘gam’] the man of my peace [King James Translator’s Notes, ‘mine ..’: Heb., ‘the man of my peace’], in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread [meaning a very close relationship, as was James in receiving the sop from Jesus], has greatly supplanted me [Douay-Rheims].” So, for the correct Psalm 41:8-9, we have:
“An evil thought has set upon him, that he will not rise up from his slumber.
Moreover, the man of my peace, in whom I trusted, who ate of my bread, has greatly supplanted me.” – Psalm 41:8-9
Thus, this is a situation not of attack, but succession. James (“Judas”) is the one replacing Jesus. Jacob’s Hebrew name is Ya’akov, which means “he will follow”, from the Hebrew root A.K.V., which also gives the word ekev, “heel”. When Jacob and his twin, Esau, are born in Genesis 25:26, we read: “Afterward his [Esau’s] brother came out, with his hand gripping Esau’s heel [ekev]; so he was named Jacob [‘he will follow’]”, NSRV. Jacob’s name is a double pun, playing on “heel” and “he will follow”.5 Jacobus is Greek for Ya’akov, and wonder of wonders, … JAMES is English for Jacob. Maybe this is why the gospel writer John picked this Psalm. Jesus never said anything about anybody’s “heel”, but he may indeed have said something about his “follower”, James. It was just too tempting for John not to use to incriminate arch-Jew Judas. This “follow” dynamic, of course, was seen earlier, in ‘the naked young man’ in Mark 14, as James, again, “following” Jesus.
5Dr. Joel M. Hoffman, “And God Said”, page 33.
John 13:30, “After receiving the morsel, he [Judas] immediately went out; and it was night.” Then the most astounding thing is said by Jesus, missed by nearly everyone who reads it, so powerful is the ages-old orthodox Jesus-centrist bias. John 13:31-32: “When he [‘Judas’] had gone out, Jesus said, ‘Now is the Son of man glorified, and in him God is glorified; if God is glorified IN HIM, God will glorify him in himself, and glorify him AT ONCE.'” Jesus is not talking about himself here. He is talking about the fellow that just left the room! JUDAS! This is James, the successor. He is overwritten as Judas to hide him from view. The very next line, John 13:33a proves it: “Little children, yet a little while I am with you”. He just before has said God would glorify the Son of man “at once”. Then he says, “yet a little while I am with you.” This is time spent with them before his death on the cross, but after God does his ‘glorifying’. The glorification he is speaking of has nothing to do with HIM. He is extolling the glory of his successor, not of himself, and that man is James, not Judas. Jesus does not need glorifying, nor does he want it. What he wants is glorification for his successor. This is what all Masters do (“I am not worthy to undo his sandals”…) As he just said in John 12:28, the Father’s Name (”the Son’, the Holy Spirit) has been glorified and will be again. He meant glorified again — as the successor.
Returning to the “young man” who flees naked in Mark 14, the new Master who is not desirous of becoming Master and runs away, or “flees” (up, in spirit) “naked”: “Naked man with naked man”, the part which gives trouble to so many in the Secret Gospel of Mark is mystic allegory. They are naked spiritually! (“Some are afraid lest they rise naked”, 56:25, Gospel of Philip.) The disciples are told to sell whatever necessary (“your mantle”, to rise “naked”!) to “buy a sword” in Luke 22:36, only to be told that the two they already have are “Enough” (22:38). That’s because these “swords” are the Word, as it is elsewhere, like Revelation (“sword out of his mouth”) — the Masters James and Jesus, as Word — and they as disciples, need to get it for themselves, from the Masters! Peter is the one (“one of them”) who strikes the servant’s RIGHT ‘ear’ (Luke 22:50, John 18:10) with the Sword (of the spirit). Jesus, through Peter (according to John) as Master, “touched [Greek, haptomai”, meaning “to touch to influence”] his ear and healed him” — not healed it, but healed HIM. He healed HIM! Spiritually! He initiated the servant of the High Priest (metaphor for any disciple of God) with the Word, heard ‘in’ his right “ear”. Even today, practicing mystics are taught to listen to the mystical, etheric “Word” with, yes, the right ‘ear’. The Kabbalah, the Jewish mystic tradition, has details to verify this.
In John chapter 18, Judas would not have had access to soldiers, because the chief priests wouldn’t have had the authority (18:3). Jesus said “Whom do you seek?”. “If it is me you seek, let the others go.” Mark has “one of those standing near”, which is the original, “standing” being a code word for righteousness (Eisenman), and Matthew has “one of those with”, Luke, “one of those”. As in Zechariah 13, the sword is symbolic of the initiating Master’s Word, or power of Spirit. Only John, which is late, has Peter striking with the sword, which is wrong, and not matched in the synoptic tradition. The dynamic here is a transposition of an arresting party in place of a seeker, Malchus, coming to look for his Master, James. The arrest is an overlay to hide the handing off of duties of Mastership to disciple James. The tip-off is the synoptic ambiguous identification of the one wielding the sword that strikes Malchus. It is not Peter, but James. James takes it upon himself to initiate Malchus, but Jesus protests, “Put your sword into its sheath; shall I not drink the cup which the Father has given me?” He is to take on the karmas of his initiated disciple, not James That’s why Jesus says in Matthew 26:56 that “all this has taken place that the the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” It is so that “of those whom thou gavest me, I have lost not one”. In John 18:9, just after he says, “If you seek me, let these others go”, and before the ear cutting, Jesus says, “This was to fulfill the word which he had spoken [John 17:12], ‘Of those whom thou gavest me, I lost none.'” Jesus is saying to the ‘Judas’ entourage — really James’ — that the successor will take up in spirit any of his ‘given’ who may not yet have realized his form within, this being cleverly twisted by the author John to look like a condemnation of arch-villain Jew, “Judas”. Malchus was the last “one” (of “not one is lost”) to be saved (except perhaps for the man on the cross next to him). They are the ones who came to Jesus “through their Word [spirit]” in John 17:20. The curiously unnamed “disciple” here (18:15), who “knew the high priest” and who followed Jesus “into the court”, and then went “out” and “spoke” to the “maid” who “kept the door”and who brought Peter “in”, was James. Peter says “I am not” when she asks him, “Are you not also one of his disciples?” He is not concentrating enough to go within, and “denies him three times” after Jesus “comes” to the disciples three times (in their meditation) in all three of the Synoptics. “Pray that you may not enter into temptation” and “WATCH and pray …” is not simply asking for that boon, but doing the work of meditating so that the mind doesn’t waver under the influence of passions. “Rise, let us be going” is really rising up within spiritually, not like ‘getting up’ off the ground.
Finally, in Acts, Luke again has James hide as Judas, according to Peter, in the election to replace the wayward ‘Judas’: “For he was numbered among us and allotted his share in this ministry”, Acts 1:17. The one to replace Judas had to be someone with the group from the beginning, as James was (1:21), and a “witness to his resurrection” (1:22) as James was in apocryphal sources like Gospel According to the Hebrews, if not named openly in post-resurrection gospel appearances, such as John 21. (Why not named? Mark 16 has the three women see the “young man [from 14:51-52], dressed in a white robe” in the tomb “sitting on the right side”, after Jesus told the high priest earlier “you [pl.] will see the Son of man sitting beside the right hand of Power.” Wouldn’t this be James, like GATH has it for the order of appearances? We saw that Mark 14, “naked young man” was James. It is because Luke wants James out of the picture.). Judas is also the character who “falling headlong” dies in an apparent suicide in Acts 1, the same words describing how after James is attacked by Paul (as “Saul”) he “falls headlong” from the Temple wing in Clement’s Pseudoclementine Recognitions (ch. LXX). This “Judas” is then replaced as a disciple by a certain “Matthias”, a mysterious character we never hear from again — with the defeated candidate tellingly named “Joseph Barsabbas JUSTUS, the Latinized version of James’ cognomen, the Just One, brother of Jesus, son of (bar) Joseph (abba), putative father of Jesus (at least among those not inclined to virgin birth tales). Is it clear now that “Judas” was really James?
James as ‘Lazarus’
In John 11, 11:35-36 has Lazarus as Beloved: “Jesus wept” (the shortest verse in the Bible). Behold how he loved him”, the same beloved “disciple” who in 13:23-25, is asked by Peter to ask Jesus who it is who will “betray” him. During the supper, this “disciple whom Jesus loved” was reclining so closely to Jesus as to be “close to his breast” — in the bosom of Jesus, as Jesus is in the bosom of the Father, and as Lazarus of the rich man parable is in the bosom of Abraham — apparently so close that Peter found it necessary to address Jesus through this beloved disciple rather than directly. This is an important sign of rank, and Peter is deferring to this disciple. In Matthew 26:25 Jesus replies, “You have said so” in reply to the query from Judas as to who would “betray” Jesus, but in John 13:26, Jesus says “It is he to whom I shall give this morsel when I have dipped it” to the Beloved Disciple, who asks it. This ties the Beloved Disciple to both Judas and now James, from the Gospel According to the Hebrews, which says the bread was given to James.
John 10:4 says Jesus said “the illness is not unto death”, but John 10:14 has Jesus declaring flatly that “Lazarus is dead”. What does this mean? It can’t be both “illness not until death” and “Lazarus is dead”, can it? No. It means he is dead spiritually. After “raising” him spiritually, Jesus “walked no more openly among the Jews” but went to Ephraim near the wilderness with his disciples (Qumran?) and then to Bethany where Lazarus was in the house of his sister Mary, sister to Martha, six days before Passover. This is the same time-frame in the Synoptics and Gospel of Judas for what is shown to be the installing of James as Master in “the Betrayal” story. This was likely written in Hebrew by Matthew as “to deliver”, then translated and rewritten as “betrayal” with all the overwriting of ‘betrayer Judas’ and put back into Greek Matthew, after Luke and Mark had written the betrayal story. It is a thorough overwriting of the scene where James becomes successor Master to Jesus. It is what should also be in Acts 1, the election of “Matthias” to replace “Judas” (which is actually James replacing Jesus, what logically should be reported here and is not, as shown by Eisenman6).
6Eisenman, “James the Brother of Jesus”, chapter 8, p. 154ff.
In Bethany, Mary anointed Jesus with costly oil, a symbolic anointing in the presence of Lazarus. Enter Judas complaining of the anointing of the feet with costly oil by Mary (John 12:3-4). It was better used (12:5) for “THE POOR” (the Jamesians). John 12:8: “THE POOR you have always, but me you have not always.” That’s Jesus saying James will take over from him, but that they really should contact the Word through him, the initiating Master. Like Paul his mentor, John uses “the Poor” to disparage James, as a “thief” in the person of Judas. He has “the box” of money in 13:29, and “some thought that Jesus was telling him ‘Buy what you need for the Feast’ or that he should give something to the Poor”, another allusion to Jamesians. Now the crowds come wanting to see not just Jesus but Lazarus, whom he has raised from the dead (12:9). The chief priests plot to kill him (12:10) “because many of the Jews believed on Jesus because of him” (12:11) — this is the same as “but those who did come to believe [on Jesus] did so because of James … ” as is said of James in Hegesippus, via Eusebius7. The people not only wanted to see the one who was raised by Jesus, causing them “to believe on him” as was said of James in Hegesippus, but the officials wanted him DEAD, just as they did James in Hegesippus. “Lazarus” is, then, also James.
7Eusebius, The History of the Church, p.59.
The oil is, of course, symbolic of the spiritual anointing. Josephus also mentions bathing and wearing nothing but linen, both features of the Betrayal scenario, as practices of Essenes like John the Baptist and James. John 13:10, “He who has bathed does not need to wash, except for his feet, but he is clean all over; and you are clean, but not all of you” is about Masters assuming some of the karmas of their disciples8, not that “one of them” is unclean as betrayer. Only the feet need to be washed, and is easily done when the Master sees fit. Jesus tells them a servant is not greater than his Master, but says he is not speaking “of you all”. “I know whom I have chosen” (13:18). This is Jesus telling them that he has picked his successor, not his betrayer. He says he tells them now so that when it takes place “you may believe that I am he”. This is very deep. He means that he, Jesus Christ, is the successor! Just like John was Elijah, Jesus was James. All Masters are One. “You will be replaced by someone”, Gospel of Judas, 36:1.
8Maharaj Charan Singh, “Light on St. John”, p. 190.
‘Lazarus’ in John takes on the role of James in Hegesippus:
What follows are the parallel accounts of Hegesippus and John regarding Hegesippus’ “those who did believe [on Jesus], believed because of James” (compare Lazarus, John 12:11) and his being killed in Hegesippus by the scribes and Pharisees (first falling “headlong” (that’s the tie-in), as Judas does in Acts 1) and Lazarus being marked for death in John by the chief priests (12:10). Note that James was vegetarian and drank no wine, in keeping with the lifestyle of all Masters. Two notes are included linking pronouncements by James, according to early church Father Hegesippus, that are credited to Jesus in Mark/Matthew, and Luke:
Hegesippus: Concerning the martyrdom of James, the brother of the Lord, from Book V
1 Jesus therefore, six days before the pasch, came to Bethania, where Lazarus had been dead, whom Jesus raised to life. 2 And they made him a supper there: and Martha served. But Lazarus was one of them that were at table with him. 3 Mary therefore took a pound of ointment of right spikenard, of great price, and anointed the feet of Jesus and wiped his feet with her hair. And the house was filled with the odour of the ointment. 4 Then one of his disciples, Judas Iscariot, he that was about to betray him, said: 5 ” Why was not this ointment sold for three hundred pence and given to the poor?” 6 Now he said this not because he cared for the poor; but because he was a thief and, having the purse, carried the things that were put therein. 7 Jesus therefore said: “Let her alone, that she may keep it against the day of my burial. 8 For the poor you have always with you: but me you have not always.” 9 A great multitude therefore of the Jews knew that he was there; and they came, not for Jesus’ sake only, but that they might see Lazarus, whom he had raised from the dead. 10 But the chief priests thought to kill Lazarus also: 11 Because many of the Jews, by reason of him, went away and believed in Jesus. 12 And on the next day, a great multitude that was come to the festival day, when they had heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, 13 Took branches of palm trees and went forth to meet him and cried Hosanna. Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord, the king of Israel. 14 And Jesus found a young ass and sat upon it, as it is written: 15 Fear not, daughter of Sion: behold thy king cometh, sitting on an ass’s colt. 16 These things his disciples did not know at the first: but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written of him and that they had done these things to him. 17 The multitude therefore gave testimony, which was with him, when he called Lazarus out of the grave and raised him from the dead. 18 For which reason also the people came to meet him, because they heard that he had done this miracle. 19 The Pharisees therefore said among themselves: “Do you see that we prevail nothing? Behold, the whole world is gone after him.”
The ‘poor’ man of Luke ch. 16 in the parable of the Rich man/poor Lazarus (16:24: “send Lazarus”, who has risen) is again James, of course. The rich man, while having enjoyed worldly pleasures while alive in the world, is now in torment in Hades and calls out to Abraham, with Lazarus “in his bosom”. (Interestingly, some have said “Abraham” could be an anagram allusion to “Brahama”, the Hindu deity.) The Rich man and the father with five sons are Caiaphas and the Ananus clan with five successive high priests as sons of Ananus (father-in-law and brothers-in-law to Caiaphas), culminating with the one installed in 62 CE who condemned James (John 12:10: “So the chief priests made plans to kill Lazarus as well”), for what? — not telling the people that Jesus was not still Christ (“even if someone rises from the dead” Jesus says to Caiaphas, again just as Hegesippus says of Jesus, via Eusebius)9. Two scholars from the 19th century (Sepp and Drioux) already came up with this. It is further evidence of the linkage of James to Lazarus. [end quote]
9Eisenman, “James the Brother of Jesus”, ch. 9, page 211.
The timing of Jesus coming to Bethany in John 12:1 just prior to the betrayal is paired with this: Lazarus’ house in Bethany is Mary’s house, sister to Martha. It is “John Mark’s” house (Acts 12:12), which is in fact James’ house: It is the same one where the message was taken for James in Acts 12 that Peter had escaped Herod’s imprisonment — Herod’s reason unspecified (his imprisonment a metaphor for entrapment in the body, this imprisonment chapter, Acts 12, is a chronicling of Peter’s becoming a Master, just as “the Betrayal” in Gethsemane is for James becoming a Master). Every detail in Peter’s “prison break” is metaphor for bodily release upon becoming a perfect Master: “sleeping” in the body unaware of God, chains of desire falling from his hands, the angel “raising him up” from his lower mind, “light” in the “cell”, “striking” (Zechariah 13:7) by the spirit on the side (remember — right side ‘ear’ in Mark as symbol of the ascending subtle energy etheric ‘prana’, or life force), two soldiers guarding the cell akin to the two inner pranic currents going up and down (the two “fishes”, symbolic in the loaves and fishes story, and the “fish” in Jonah and the great fish story), the girding with sandals against the world, wrapping the Mantle of Mastership around himself (Elisha picks up Elijah’s “mantle” in 2 Kings 2:13, becoming his successor), the gate that leads “unto the City” opening itself, and Peter “coming to himself” — the exact words used at the close of the Apocalypse of Peter, wherein Peter is a portrayed as Master.
Acts 12:12-19. Peter “knocks” on the “door” (the single eye of the body) where “many were gathered together” in meditation. Rhoda hears Peter’s “voice” (his Word) and does not “open the door of the gate [to heaven] for gladness”, but instead “runs in” (within) and tells the others of Peter’s “arrival” (from above!). She insists she is not mad, and they say it is “his angel”. Peter continues “knocking” until the door is opened, they see him, and are “amazed”. He tells them it was the Lord who brought him out of “prison” (his body) and to go and tell James, who is the Successor. “Then he departed and went to another place” (v 17b). This is not specified, of course, because the “place” he went was UP! By “day” — when the mind is again in the body — “Herod” (mind) has the guards of the cell “slain” — the desires that chained Peter are now extinct.
There are a number of interesting aspects to the Coptic Gospel of Judas. In the Incipit, or Introduction, to “The Gospel of Judas”, the communication between Jesus and Judas is “by means of this Logos” or “in this Logos with” Judas10. It is the ethereal, mystic Word of John 1, the Name or Voice of God in other traditions. Consensus scholarly opinion is currently that “Apophasis Logos”, in the incipit, or introduction, is “secret account of the revelation”, or “secret word of denial”, or “secret declaration of verdict”, or any number of other variants, none of which is particularly helpful. The mystic Apophasis Logos is the Unspoken Word, as the Greek borrow here implies. (“Apophasis” is Greek for “that which is said without saying”. “Logos” is Greek for “Word”.) This is the etheric, mystical Word, or Shabd (Sanskrit, Hindi) which is the true form of the Master, given — not spoken — to Judas “in the week before Passover”. Page 33, lines 18- 21, should read, “But often he does not appear to his disciples as himself, but they find him within themselves as a Spirit”, not “among them as a child”, a misapplication of the Coptic word, “hrot”. It also appears in the introduction to the Gospel of Thomas. Jesus appeared as “a vision”, not as a “child”, to the disciples in their meditation at line 33:21 (“among them” should be “within them” as a vision). It is peculiar as a second-person passage, and looks to be a possible later addition, or interpolation. But the sense is correct as “vision”. On page 35, three times appears the Qumranic “standing one” phraseology. Only Judas is able to “stand” before Jesus face-to-face. This is indication of his elevated status among the disciples. He still could not “look him in the eyes” as his inner gaze was not yet steady. “Step away from the others, and I shall show you the Mysteries of the kingdom, not so that you will go there, but you will grieve a great deal” at 35:23-27 is correct, although the variant, “it is possible for you to reach it” could also be correct. Judas personally won’t reach the kingdom, but his Master — replacing him — will: “Someone else will replace you” follows. Judas merges into Jesus and ascends. He does not become the disgraced replaced apostle, but rather, as the first-born of the Twelve, helps the others to become one with God. When Judas is told that he will “grieve much when you see the kingdom and all its generations”, Judas asks Jesus, “What is the advantage that I have received? For you have set me apart from [not “for” as some scholars have it] that generation.” He answers Judas, “You will become the Thirteenth, you will be cursed by the other generations, and you will come to rule over them” (46:16-23). Judas is “set apart from” the generations because he, Judas, will not “ascend on high to the holy generation” (46:25- 47:1), JESUS will, after replacing him. As he told him in 45:14, “No person of mortal birth may enter the house you have seen, for that place is reserved for the holy.” He has become ‘the Thirteenth’ — he is one with the Father. It is why in the recently translated fragment, top of page 58, says ,”And Judas stopped gazing [at] Jesus.” He is now One with the Father, and Jesus, in Spirit — not that Jesus has ascended without him, as consensus scholars believe. This holy place reserved for those who sacrifice themselves is “the region never called by any name” (47:13), or “Anami Desh” of Sant Mat, the “No-Name Region”.11
10Gregor Wurst, “The Gospel of Judas Critical Edition”, page 179.
11Swami Ji, “Sar Bachan”, page 31
The “kings that have grown weak” in the Gospel of Judas (56:2-5?) are lust, anger, greed, attachment, and vanity, in the teachings of Sant Mat.12 They are the same “kings” slain without mercy by Joshua in Joshua 10:16-28, in his meditation.13 They are the “five combatants” (55:18-19) which Judas must overcome to become a Master. The “water that flows off the lofty mountain” is an echo of Isaiah 30:25, “And there shall be upon every high mountain, and upon every high hill, rivers and streams of waters in the day of the great slaughter, when the towers fall” (KJV). This is reference to the Shabd, or Word, which flows as a ceaseless river of grace from above. The passions are the slaughtered enemy. The descriptions of the inner Light that follow in Isaiah 30 are among the most beautiful ever written: “The Name of the Lord comes from afar… His breath is like a rushing torrent…” (30:27-28) give Life to the “mighty rushing wind” of John 3:8 which Jesus tells Nicodemus will be his rebirth. This is the Apophasis Logos of Judas and Thomas, the “Name” above all others, there being none other, Peter says, in Acts 4:12: “no other Name under heaven by which men must be saved.” It wasn’t “Jesus Christ of Nazareth” that saved Peter, but “the Name of” Jesus that saved him. “Jesus” was the bodily vehicle of the saving Name in his time.
12Swami Ji, “Sar Bachan”, pp 81-83, Scribd.com, & RSSB.org
13Dr. Randolph Stone, “Mystic Bible”, RSSB Publ.
Confirmation that James succeeds Jesus is abundant in the gnostic gospels, like the “Gospel of Judas” and the “First and Second Apocalypses of James”. Judas (James) “will exceed them all” — “sacrificing” himself, just like he does in the gospel “Betrayal” scene and then trying to flee, spiritually “naked”, from his Mastership in Mark 14. Later, James is recognized in all sources as leader of the Jerusalem Assembly and in the Dead Sea Scrolls Pesherim as Righteous Teacher at Qumran14, saving thousands.
14 Eisenman, “The Dead Sea Scrolls and the First Christians”, ch. 9, p. 332.
“For as you have drunk on my holy mountain,
so all the nations shall drink continually;
they shall drink and swallow,
and shall be as though they had never been.
[Compare this with the Gospel of Judas, and Mark 14:21]
Saviors shall ascend Mount Zion to rule Mount Esau;
and the kingdom shall be the Lord’s” – Obadiah 1:16, 21.