Jesus does not appear in any early sacred text claimed by Christianity - this is an undisputed fact. These texts use abbreviations and they spell IS/JS; no explanation was provided in that period, leaving us to speculate on the name.
When we look at Judea in the first half of the 1st century, we see many people named Jesus, though not a single one fitting anything like the description of the divine man of the textual tradition. Neither Jesus Chrest
, nor Jesus Christ
exist in the historical record.
The various religious traditions described this divine man as the undisputed leader of a religious community in Judea. The historical record contains one such group and it is not Christian; it was called by outsiders Essenes, based in Qumran
, buried the Dead Sea Scrolls and its leader was James, until he died by an extra-judicial killing in 62.
There is a record of this killing:
It is impossible that this passage is entirely genuine. It is highly unlikely that Josephus, a believing Jew working under Romans, would have written, "He was the Messiah." This would make him suspect of treason, but nowhere else is there an indication that he was a Christian. Indeed, in Wars of the Jews, Josephus declares that Vespasian fulfilled the messianic oracles. Furthermore, Origen, writing about a century before Eusebius, says twice that Josephus "did not believe in Jesus as the Christ."
Here is the text, with the interpolation greyed out:
CONCERNING ALBINUS UNDER WHOSE PROCURATORSHIP JAMES WAS SLAIN; AS ALSO WHAT EDIFICES WERE BUILT BY AGRIPPA.
1. AND now Caesar, upon hearing the death of Festus, sent Albinus into Judea, as procurator. But the king deprived Joseph of the high priesthood, and bestowed the succession to that dignity on the son of Ananus, who was also himself called Ananus. Now the report goes that this eldest Ananus proved a most fortunate man; for he had five sons who had all performed the office of a high priest to God, and who had himself enjoyed that dignity a long time formerly, which had never happened to any other of our high priests. But this younger Ananus, who, as we have told you already, took the high priesthood, was a bold man in his temper, and very insolent; he was also of the sect of the Sadducees, who are very rigid in judging offenders, above all the rest of the Jews, as we have already observed; when, therefore, Ananus was of this disposition, he thought he had now a proper opportunity [to exercise his authority]. Festus was now dead, and Albinus was but upon the road; so he assembled the sanhedrim of judges, and brought before them the brother of Jesus, who was called Christ, whose name was James, and some others, [or, some of his companions]; and when he had formed an accusation against them as breakers of the law, he delivered them to be stoned: but as for those who seemed the most equitable of the citizens, and such as were the most uneasy at the breach of the laws, they disliked what was done; they also sent to the king [Agrippa], desiring him to send to Ananus that he should act so no more, for that what he had already done was not to be justified; nay, some of them went also to meet Albinus, as he was upon his journey from Alexandria, and informed him that it was not lawful for Ananus to assemble a sanhedrim without his consent. Whereupon Albinus complied with what they said, and wrote in anger to Ananus, and threatened that he would bring him to punishment for what he had done; on which king Agrippa took the high priesthood from him, when he had ruled but three months, and made Jesus, the son of Damneus, high priest.
Josephus in The Jewish War considered Ananus "unique in his love for liberty and an enthusiast for democracy" and as an "effective speaker, whose words carried weight with the people".
After ben Hanan was deposed as high priest, he continued to exercise leadership. "Under the guidance of former high priest Ananus ben Ananus, they (the Sanhedrin) exhorted the populace for support against the radical priestly Zealots, as these 'persuaded those who officiated in the Temple sacrifices to accept no gift or services from a foreigner' (BJ II, 409-414)." Later, he marshaled recruits to fight the Zealots, resulting in the Zealot Temple Siege. While commanding the Jews during the siege, Ananus was killed by the Edomites when they were let into Jerusalem by the Zealots.
Note: this Felix was a freedman of Antonia Minor, leading Chrestian
A contemporaneous record exists within the Dead Sea Scrolls; sources within the Christian textual tradition should be dismissed, Hegesippus
for example is just a corruption of Josephus:
If one looks at the ambiance of the Is 3:10 passage applied to James' death by these early Church sources, one encounters from about Is I-5 a general tenor of salvation through Righteousness and allusion to the imminent destruction of Jerusalem. The text directly appeals to the "Beit-Ya'acov”, James’ Hebrew name - repeated three times (which would doubtlessly have appealed to the practitioners of this kind of exegesis) and amid an atmosphere of oncoming armies and imminent destruction precisely analogous to the Habakkuk Pesher intones:
“Jerusalem is ruined; Judea is fallen...the Lord is taking away from Jerusalem support of every kind". These last should be compared with the insistence in early Church sources that James’ death was in some way connected to the fall of Jerusalem and Paul's description of the central triad of the early Church of “James, Cephas, and John” as “these Pillars". The last in our view incorporates a direct allusion to James’ Zaddik-nature, which by extension can be seen as a “Zadokite” play (as per the general thrust of Qumran esoteric exegesis and wordplay) on the sense of Proverbs' "the Zaddik the Foundation of the World”.
The rise of such a style of exegesis explains why the early "Church" felt that the destruction of Jerusalem was inevitable once its “Protection”, "Bulwark”, or “Pillar” (all allusions having counterparts in the usage of IQH and IQS) was removed.
Zaddik-the-Pillar-of-the-World metaphor is also at the root of the allusion to James the Righteous One in the Gospel of Thomas and related materials concerning the disappearance of “Heaven and Earth" in the New Testament “Little Apocalypses”. It is the basic thrust behind whatever may be meant by the Oblias sobriquet which also attached itself to James’ person. Though the precise derivation of the latter is unclear, Eusebius/Hegesippus make it clear that it related to James’ “support”/“Protection” activities among the mass of Jewish "Poor" (
Aniyyim - “the
Rabbim” of Qumran/Is 53:11 allusion). With all of this data at our disposal, it would not be difficult to imagine the content of a Qumran-style peskier on the first four or five chapters of Isaiah (including an important oracle which has relevance for controversies regarding the Pella-flight tradition: “to flee into the Rocks and the caves“), so exactly parallel in tone and content to the first few chapters of Habakkuk we will analyze. (
James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher)
What we may know of James
Historically Ya'aqub/James has been referred to as the Tzadik
(Hebrew: צדיק "righteous one") and could be considered a miracle-worker.
The Essene character of James "the Little," or "the Just," seems to rest on authentic tradition. According to Epiphanius ("Hæres." lxxviii. 14), he wore a golden plate on his forehead (comp. Meg. iv. 8, where this is characterized as "the way of the Gnostics" ["derek minut" or "ḥizonim"]), and no sandals. Another evidence of his Essene piety manifests itself in the following: "When, during a drought, he stretched forth his hands in prayer, rain immediately came" (comp. Ta'an. 23a et seq.).
It is possible that the last words ascribed to Jesus were original with James the Just. (James, Jewish Encyclopedia)
Eisenman first draws a portrait of the early community of James as a nationalistic, messianic, priestly, and xenophobic sect of ultra-legal pietism, something most of us would deem fanaticism. (Robert Eiseman's JAMES THE BROTHER OF JESUS: A Higher-Critical Evaluation, Robert M. Price, Drew University)
These "Internal" data markers include, for instance: 1) several references to "the Community of the Poor" (that is, "the Ebionim" - popularly expressed as "the Ebionites", the same name as the Community James is supposed to have led in all Early Church literature); 2) that "
the Wicked Priest", exactly as in the Habakkuk Pesher, sought to "
put to death the Righteous Teacher", for which act - again as in the Habakkuk Pesher - God would "
pay him His reward by delivering him into the hands of the Violent Ones of the Gentiles (i.e., "the 'Arizei ha-Go'im")
to execute Judgement upon him" - in the Habakkuk Pesher, it is "
upon the body of his flesh" (thus the late G. Vermes, but really "
the flesh of his body" - for footnotes on matters such as these, see the total expanse of my work from 1977 to the present, including
Maccabees, Zadokites, Christians, and Qumran and
James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher, E. J. Brill, 1984-86,
The Dead Sea Scrolls and the First Christians,1996, and
The New Testament Code, 2006 above).
This last, of course, is exactly what happens to James' destroyer, the High Priest Ananus ben Ananus, if one reads one's Josephus carefully, when the "
Idumaeans" (i. e., the true "
Violent Ones of the Gentiles", but in this instance allied to the revolutionary "
Zealots" and "
Sicarii") rampage through the City killing all the High Priests they come upon (who were viewed as "
collaborators"); but, in particular, Ananus ben Ananus, mocking his dead body - perhaps even urinating upon it to render it impure - before throwing it outside the walls of the city without burial naked, as food for jackals and wolves. One might ask , why - why such abnormal hostility? You, dear reader, tell me. This is a good example of what can develop out of "the Internal Data" when used in a properly intelligent manner. (James the Just as Righteous Teacher -- The Radiocarbon Controversy, Robert Eisenman 10/22/2013)
James is JS
Since the public began to see translations of the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Teacher of Righteousness
appeared, many saw the obvious parallel, that here was the historical record of the gospel's divine man, known commonly (though erroneously) as Jesus. This view best fits the reliable evidence and thus is most likely correct.
The JS of the early sacred texts (later claimed and remade as Christian) is probably James.
There is no comparable figure to James in that period; for earlier, there is John the Baptiser; these two are in a line of such office holders:
James was a rainmaker like Elijah, Honi the Circle-maker, and Hanan the Wise. Nathanael is another mask for James. Jesus finds him, conspicuously, sitting beneath a fig tree, the posture of rain-makers, as they waited (in a gesture of anticipative, imitative magic) for their prayers to be answered. (Robert Eisenman, The New Testament Code: The Cup of the Lord, the Damascus Covenant, and the Blood of Christ, reviewed by Robert M. Price)
For Habakkuk as rain-maker, see the whole narrative relating to Honi and his descendants in b. Ta‘an 23aff. That James, too, functioned as a rain-maker is conﬁrmed by Epiphanius in Haeres. 78.14 (the notice is too original to be simply dismissed as spurious). As such, he is a contemporary of and exhibits suspiciously similar characteristics to another “rain-making” grandson of Honi, Abba Hilkiah. Rabbinic literature unerringly designates Phineas as a rain-maker, anticipating Elijah in this activity, his successor in the redivivus tradition, and depicts similar activities on the part of Hanan ha-Nebba, another grandson of Honi, who is often identiﬁed with John the Baptist. (James the Just in the Habakkuk Pesher by Robert Eisenman)
John/Hanan was not baptising, he and his followers used mikveh
for cleansing, as we see both in the archaeology of Qumran (image right) and in Jewish practice
See also: James: Resistance Leader
in an essay by Dr. Andrew P. Gould, Ohio State U. Distinguished Professor of Mathematical and Physical Sciences
John and James were leaders of the same community at Qumran - probably the world's first monastery - killed successively by the Herodian monarchy.
Black propaganda is false information and material that purports to be from a source on one side of a conflict, but is actually from the opposing side. It is typically used to vilify, embarrass or misrepresent the enemy.
The gospels are not history, but parody, using as their subjects the enemies of the Chrestians: Messianic Judaism, the community at Qumran (the Poor
), its leadership and associated groups such as Zealots/Sicarii
. Modern scholarship as exemplified by Eisenman and Price, show in detail how this worked.
Herod Agrippa, also known as Herod or Agrippa I (10 BC – 44 AD), was a Judean monarchduring the 1st century AD. The grandson of Herod the Great and son of Aristobulus IV and Berenice. He was born Marcus Julius Agrippa, so named in honour of Roman statesman Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. He is the king named Herod in the Acts of the Apostles, in the Bible, "Herod (Agrippa)" (Ἡρώδης Ἀγρίππας). He was, according to Josephus, known in his time as "Agrippa the Great". Christian and Jewish historiography take different views of this king, with the Christians largely opposing Agrippa and the Jews largely favoring Agrippa.
Why the parody is a natural question and perhaps the facts will help provide an answer. The time frame in the parody is moved from Herod Agrippa II to that of Herod Agrippa and this perhaps, is most significant, for the king in the parody is hated in the sacred texts:
On the appointed day Herod, wearing his royal robes, sat on his throne and delivered a public address to the people. They shouted, “This is the voice of a god, not of a man.” Immediately, because Herod did not give praise to God, an angel of the Lord struck him down, and he was eaten by worms and died. (Acts 12)
He was hated because the Chrestians regarded him as a traitor: raised as one of the child hostages (so he would be Romanised
, probably as a Chrestian). Yet he supported the Jewish cause, so that if he were to have been assassinated, as Chrestians killed other leaders (such as the emperors Nero and Domitian), then this would not surprise.
With the time shifted back, then the Roman responsible for the death also had to change, from Albinus to Pilate.
This time-shift also alters the date for the extra-judicial killing of John, the previous Qumran leader, appearing to shift the responsibility to Herod Agrippa as well.
The major characteristic of black propaganda is that the people are not aware that someone is trying to influence them, and do not feel that they are being pushed in a certain direction. Black propaganda purports to emanate from a source other than the true source. This type of propaganda is associated with covert psychological operations. Sometimes the source is concealed or credited to a false authority and spreads lies, fabrications, and deceptions. Black propaganda is the "big lie", including all types of creative deceit. Black propaganda relies on the willingness of the receiver to accept the credibility of the source.
Terrible war broke out four years after James was killed and was followed by two others, the final war being nothing less than a holocaust, destroying Messianic Judaism and with Palestine replacing Judea. The stories which were composed, changed and changed again to become the final New Testament result from this bitter struggle over the first and second centuries.
Eisenman provides numerous examples of parody
in the New Testament, including these:
...our portrait of Jesus in the Greek gospels seems largely to be an amalgam of Pauline anti-halakha and episodes borrowed from various messianic and prophetic figures in Josephus. Indeed, I have for some time thought the same thing. Does not the warning of the Synoptic Apocalypse not to confuse Jesus with other prophets and messiahs during the siege of Jerusalem imply that just such amalgamations and confusions were going on? Do not Apocalypses always forewarn their readers against doing what the author knows they are in fact doing.
In the Triumphal Entry of Jesus into Jerusalem to "cleanse" the Temple which had become a "robber's den," can we not recognize the entry of messiah Simon bar-Giora into the city at the invitation of the priesthood to "cleanse" the Temple of rival freedom fighters? And (as Eisenman and John Dominic Crossan both note) is not the mute flogging of Jesus by priests and Roman Procurator for predicting the Temple's doom suspiciously similar to that of Jesus ben-Ananias? Jesus' mockery as a king during a visit of a Herodian "king" sounds remarkably like the Carabas incident reported by Philo in Against Flaccus (again, Crossan notes this), which also echoes Barabbas, as if it needed pointing out. The attempt by the crowd to force Pilate into condemning Jesus by threatening to report his delinquency to Caesar recalls the actual complaint against Pilate made by Samaritans after he butchered the partisans of the Samaritan Taheb on Mount Gerizim, a deed which actually did result in Pilate's recall to Rome. Jesus' execution as King of the Jews reminds us of Simon bar-Giora's in Rome.
The spear thrust to confirm his death recalls that following the suicide pact of the fugitive Spartan revolutionary king Cleomenes and his cohorts in Plutarch's Lives. Similarly, the portents at Jesus' crucifixion are strikingly like those at Cleomenes' crucifixion which led the women bystanders to acclaim the slain rebel king a son of the gods and to visit the site thereafter to worship. And as Eisenman shows, even Jesus' reappearance after three days to his mourning disciples matches that of the rebel hero Niger in the Roman War, who was assumed dead by friend and foe alike, but was really hiding in a cave for three days while his lamenting followers searched for his body, only to be "surprised by joy" when he emerged from his cave alive!
Though parody was popular in Greek literature (παρῳδία parodia
), it reached new heights in 1st and 2nd century Rome with Juvenal
and his Satires
James/Stephen in Acts of the Apostles
Even for the fabricators of the New Testament, making James out to be somebody else is unoriginal.
First the biblical account:
8 And Stephen, full of grace and power, was doing great wonders and signs among the people. 9 Then some of those who belonged to the synagogue of the Freedmen (as it was called), and of the Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of those from Cilicia and Asia, rose up and disputed with Stephen. 10 But they could not withstand the wisdom and the Spirit with which he was speaking. 11 Then they secretly instigated men who said, “We have heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and God.” 12 And they stirred up the people and the elders and the scribes, and they came upon him and seized him and brought him before the council, 13 and they set up false witnesses who said, “This man never ceases to speak words against this holy place and the law, 14 for we have heard him say that this Jesus of Nazareth will destroy this place and will change the customs that Moses delivered to us.” 15 And gazing at him, all who sat in the council saw that his face was like the face of an angel.
This special, divine person is James; the person organising the attack is Saul:
Costobarus also, and Saulus, did themselves get together a multitude of wicked wretches, and this because they were of the royal family; and so they obtained favor among them, because of their kindred to Agrippa; but still they used violence with the people, and were very ready to plunder those that were weaker than themselves. And from that time it principally came to pass that our city was greatly disordered, and that all things grew worse and worse among us. (Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews - Book XX, Chapter 9. Concerning Albinus under whose Procuratorship James was slain; as also what edifices were built by Agrippa.)
A good analysis:
Paul’s Attempted Murder of James/”Stephen”
The first is the story of Stephen, the first Christian martyr, told in Acts of the Apostles. I should mention at the outset that Acts is composed of two radically different sections. The first half is similar to the Gospels in that it is a phantasmagoric, fictionalized narrative constructed by imaginative reworking of a broad melange of historical and literary materials. The second half, beginning in the middle of Chapter 16, is a more-or-less straightforward first-person-plural narrative of events actually experienced by its author (the so-called “We Document”.)
The Stephen story is in Chapters 6–7 and so is part of the phantasmagoric section. It classically recounts how Stephen is assaulted and killed by a gang of political thugs as he is debating various theological points from the Temple steps. The organizer of this gang is identified as “Saul” (“Saulos” in the original Greek, a point to which I will return), who later in Acts transforms into “Paul” after his famous vision on the “road to Damascus”. As first pointed out by Stephen H.-J. Schoeps, another document from this period, the Pseudoclementine Recognitions covers much of the same material as Acts (probably working from the same underlying source), but in place of the “Stephen” story, tells another tale, which is much more plausible. According to the Recognitions, it is James who is debating points from the Temple steps and who is attacked by political thugs. The leader of the gang is not identified in the text by name: he is simply referred to as the “enemy”. However, in the margins of some extant copies, this “enemy” is identified as “Paul”. James is not killed but suffers a broken leg and is carried off by his supporters to a location “near Jericho” (which plausibly could be Qumrum, where the Dead Sea Scrolls were found – more below). His leg is said to be still healing a month later when he sends Simon Peter out on a mission, a level of detail not likely to be invented. (Essay by Dr. Andrew P. Gould, Ohio State U. Distinguished Professor of Mathematical and Physical Sciences)
Then who is IC/JS?
Isn't it a bit odd, with James as James and James as the divine man IC (most now call Jesus)? Yes, of course and the New Testament accounts are full of such name games:
...Eisenman has developed a keen sense for the "name game" played in the sources. Most of us have sometime scratched our heads over the tantalizing confusions latent in the strange redundancy of similar names in the New Testament accounts. How can Mary have had a sister named Mary? Is there a difference between Joseph Barsabbas Justus, Judas Barsabbas Justus, Jesus Justus, Titius Justus, and James the Just? Whence all the Jameses and Judases? Who are Simon the Zealot and Judas the Zealot (who appears in some NT manuscripts and other early Christian documents)? Is Clopas the same as Cleophas? What's going on with Jesus ben-Ananias, Jesus Barabbas, Elymas bar-Jesus, and Jesus Justus? What does Boanerges really mean? Is Nathaniel a nickname for someone else we know of? And so on, and so on. Most of us puzzle over these oddities for a moment—and then move on. After all, how important can they be, anyway? (Robert Price review)
Jesus is a medieval additive, placed into the textual tradition. The role played by the nomina sacrum, IC etc, is a different matter, for this produces two James, one a named parody of the real, historical personage named James, and the other is his divine self, the Righteous Teacher in his full glory as a divine man. We see the same method with Saul the Herodian thug pursuing Messianic Jews, and Paul the divine man: God did extraordinary miracles through Paul (Acts 19:11).
There are numerous, important people named Jesus in this period, though none play the role of a divine man. Ultimately, there is just James.
Choice of nomina sacrum
That there is no contemporaneous explanation for the nomina sacra (and certainly these abbreviations are meant as sacred) and the fact that we today are far removed from both the time and culture of authors using them, ensure that our interpretations are speculative. No matter with how much certainty Christianity (and Christian scholarship) stakes its claim to them and its interpretations, it is guesswork. The best we can do to claim some legitimacy is to ensure that our speculations are informed.
Nomina sacra of the early-modern era - as used in the sacred texts later described as Gnostic (including Manichaean) and Christian - are based on the Greek language. But the practise comes from the Jewish scribal tradition:
While there is no way to be certain of the origin of this practice, most scholars believe that it sprang from the Jewish traditions connected to the writing and reading of the name of the LORD. In Hebrew, this name is spelled with four letters (HWHY, YHWH, pronounced as Yahweh). These four consonant are sometimes called “The Tetragrammaton.”
Because of the great respect that was to be given to the name of the LORD (Exodus 20:7; Leviticus 24:16 LXX), Jewish scribes were extremely careful in how they handled the Tetragrammaton. For instance, while the Hebrew alphabet changed over time (like all alphabets), Jewish scribes continued to write the Tetragrammaton with the ancient style of lettering.
Greek Magic in the early-modern era also used Jewish sacred names; Jao (for Yahweh), Sabaoth, and Adonai appear quite frequently for example. There are also quasi-Jewish cults across the Levant in this period. This desire for people of this time and place to claim some sort of Jewish heritage, or authority, has confused many modern scholars into imagining that they are all (ethnic) Jews.
I have argued here that IC is JS is James and strictly speaking, I think this is correct; however the letters do not have to represent JS - they are also IS, in which case they can also refer to Isaiah:
In the wilderness prepare the way of the Lord (Isaiah 40:3)
Photographic reproduction of the Great Isaiah Scroll, the best preserved of the biblical scrolls found at Qumran
The textual tradition associates its messiah very strongly with Isaiah:
Further, this association in the canonical gospels is more with the Righteous Teacher preceding James:
In all four Gospels Isaiah 40:3 is cited with reference to the ministry of John the Baptist, but with a different interpretation. In John's Gospel the citation of Isaiah 40:3 is attributed directly to the Baptist. Whether John was a member of the Qumran community or heavily influenced by them, when the word of the Lord came to him in the Judean wilderness he realized that Isaiah's prophecy did not describe studying the Law in isolation but proclaiming the arrival of God's chosen Messiah. At that point he began to proclaim the message of the Messiah's coming and of imminent judgment. He administered a water baptism of ritual purification and preached repentance. He anticipated that his baptizing ministry would reveal the identity of the Messiah. In John 1:31 the Baptist says, "I myself did not know him; but I came baptizing with water for this reason, that he might be revealed to Israel" (NRSV). This anticipation accords very well with the passage from the Rule of the Community we cited earlier about the man who would be plunged into the spirit and would instruct the upright, seal the covenant, and restore the glory of Adam. (The Dead Sea Scrolls and the New Testament by Mark M. Mattison)
The nomina sacrum IC/IS/JS therefore was originally meant to contain a double meaning: the messiah of Isaiah, the Righteous Teacher of the Dead Sea Scrolls; in the modern era, this was John, then James.
This divine man of the nomina sacra (Lord, Son, Spirit, Saviour, IS) is not unique among miracle workers - Paul is the divine version of Saul and in the same period as they were all made - in the early-3rd century - others also appeared: Thomas, Apollonius of Tyana and Izates/Izas. They are each rooted in the first century; Izates/Izas has his own Annunciation, is born in the year 1, comes from the same literary source - Josephus - as does most of the textual tradition, and fits the nomina sacrum IS perfectly. This is important in understanding IS, because he is purely literary, no matter how divine, no matter whom he is drawn from; he is a literary device, a fiction, made as a point to sink into the messianic heart:
One of the Pharisees asked him to eat with him, and he went into the Pharisee's house and reclined at the table. And behold, a woman of the city, who was a sinner, when she learned that he was reclining at table in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster flask of ointment, and standing behind him at his feet, weeping, she began to wet his feet with her tears and wiped them with the hair of her head and kissed his feet and anointed them with the ointment. Now when the Pharisee who had invited him saw this, he said to himself, “If this man were a prophet, he would have known who and what sort of woman this is who is touching him, for she is a sinner.” And IS answering said to him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” And he answered, “Say it, Teacher.” (Luke 7:36-40)
The reader who thinks these are the words of anyone but a propagandist hating Messianic Judaism is ignorant of Judea in the first 130 years of the modern era. Such a Teacher could not have existed; he is a parody of the Righteous Teachers.
A congregation of treacherous men
Here is the beginning of the (Cairo) Damascus Document; it states most clearly the division between the Community and its enemy in the first century, those choosing the Greco-Roman way of life and, like Saul, attacked the Righteous:
FRAGMENTS OF A ZADOKITE WORK
also known as The Damascus Document
Translated by R. H Charles
1 1 Now, therefore, hearken (unto me) all ye who know righteousness,
2 And have understanding in the works of God.
For He hath a controversy with all flesh,
And will execute judgment upon all who despise Him.
3 For because of the trespass of those who forsook Him,
He hid His face from Israel and from His Sanctuary,
And gave them over to the sword.
4 But when He remembered the covenant of the forefathers,
He left a remnant to Israel, and gave them not over to destruction.
5 [And in the period of the wrath three hundred and ninety years after He had given them in the hand of
Nebuchadnezzar*, the King of Babylon He visited them],
and He made to spring forth from Israel and Aaron,
A root of His planting to inherit His land,
And to grow fat through the goodness of His earth.
6 And they had understanding of their iniquity,
And they knew that they were guilty men,
And had like the blind been groping after the way twenty years.
7 And God considered their works; for they sought Him with a perfect heart
And He raised them up a Teacher of righteousness
To lead them in the way of His heart.
8 And He made known to later generations
what He had done [to a later generation] to a congregation of treacherous men:
Those who turned aside out of the way.
9 This was the time concerning which it was written:
So hath Israel behaved himself stubbornly:
10 When there arose the scornful man,
Who talked to Israel lying words,
And made them go astray in the wilderness where there was no way,
[to bring low the pride of the world].
11 So that they should turn aside from the paths of righteousness,
And remove the landmark which the forefathers had set in their inheritance:
12 So as to make cleave unto them
The curses of His covenant,
To deliver them to the sword
That avengeth with the vengeance of the covenant.
13 Because they sought after smooth things,
And kept watch with a view to lawless deeds.
14 And they chose the best of the neck,
And justified the wicked,
And condemned the righteous:
15 And transgressed the covenant,
And violated the statute,
And attacked the soul of the righteous.
16 And all that walked uprightly their soul abhorred,
And they pursued them with the sword,
And rejoiced in the strife of the people.
17 And so the wrath of God was kindled against their congregation,
So that He laid waste all their multitude,
And their deeds were uncleanness before Him.
* The Talmudic Chronology (as defined by Rabbi Yossi, disciple of Rabbi Akiva) places this in the Herodian period.
This document was never a secret and neither was its message: the Righteous lost, the Romans won, the lesson noted.