The "gospel" of Barnabas

[Faith1960]

And? Why then is the question being asked in the first place if you indeed have? You shouldn’t then have to ask “Is it fake?” because if you REALLY had, you would have come to a conclusion.

If you indeed have, you would already have the answers and not demanding other people do their research too.

Where did I “demand” others do research, too? I do, however, expect them to have done research if they’re going to comment. Apparently you haven’t.

 

[porthos11]

Where did I “demand” others do research, too? I do, however, expect them to have done research if they’re going to comment. Apparently you haven’t.

No, I haven’t, and I don’t care.

What I do care about is you and your spiritual well-being, while this “research” is causing you harm spiritual harm.

But you don’t listen. You refuse to accept the counsel given you not just by me but by so many other posters. The issue here is not the Gospel of Barnabas. The issue is you have a weak faith which you are intentionally and possibly culpably endangering with your idle reading. So you know, I’ll leave you be. Pianistclare has tried before too but you wouldn’t listen to her either. So go ahead and continue down this destructive path. We can only say so much before we have to shake the dust off our feet.

 

[pablope]

Does anyone know if this “bible” was carbon dated? Out of the tons of articles I read on this subject, I read only two which suggested it was. They said it was approx. 1500 years old. Other articles said it could be 1500 - 2000 years old, which would put it at the time of Christ.

To keep you at ease, I could not find any carbon dating of the GoB.

But there is enough evidence to conclusively say…it is a fake, as well as the secret bible:

quora.com/What-is-the-truth-about-the-1500-year-old-Bible

The author: not Barnabas
The author of the Gospel of Barnabas could not have been the biblical Barnabas. The real Barnabas was a generous encourager of the early church (Acts 4:36-37). He was not one of the original twelve disciples of Jesus as the Gospel of Barnabas mistakenly claims. Barnabas was the one who persuaded the apostles that Paul had changed from a persecutor of the church to a follower of Jesus (Acts 9:27). The true Barnabas was a missionary, telling the good news of Jesus (Acts 13:2).

Date of authorship: the Middle Ages
If the Gospel of Barnabas were written in the first century, it would have been quoted in other documents of the same time period. It is not cited, however, a single time in works of either the church fathers or Muslim clerics until the fifteenth century. Those who claim the early authorship of the Gospel of Barnabas may be referring to the Epistle of Barnabas—a first-century book, though not divinely inspired.

A reading of the Gospel of Barnabas clearly shows that it was written neither in Jesus’ time nor shortly thereafter, as alleged. It contains far too many historical errors. The Gospel of Barnabas contains quotations from Dante Alighieri, references to an edict from Pope Boniface, and descriptions of feudalism. Therefore, scholars place the date of authorship around the fifteenth century.

Legitimacy: full of errors
The descriptions of Palestine show that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was not familiar with its geography. He alleged that Jesus sailed to Nazareth—an inland city.

The Gospel of Barnabas says that Jesus was born when Pilate was governor, but history records Pilate becoming governor in A.D. 26 or 27—long after Jesus’ birth.

Trustworthy scholars have exposed the Gospel of Barnabas as a counterfeit. Therefore, it cannot be trusted as the biography of Jesus’ life.

y-jesus.com/more/gbs-the-gospel-of-barnabas-secret-bible/4/

Christian writers such as Irenaeus wrote extensively about anti-Christian documents such as the Gnostic gospels, classifying them as heretical. Yet, not one of Ireneaus’ letters or documents mentions the Gospel of Barnabas. There is simply no mention of it from any early writer.

Perhaps most indicative of its late date is that the Gospel of Barnabas describes medieval life in Western Europe, as well as a 100-year Jubilee, which wasn’t declared until the fourteenth century. How would Barnabas or any first-century writer know such historical detail hundreds of years before it was declared?

 

[Faith1960]

To keep you at ease, I could not find any carbon dating of the GoB.

But there is enough evidence to conclusively say…it is a fake, as well as the secret bible:

quora.com/What-is-the-truth-about-the-1500-year-old-Bible

The author: not Barnabas
The author of the Gospel of Barnabas could not have been the biblical Barnabas. The real Barnabas was a generous encourager of the early church (Acts 4:36-37). He was not one of the original twelve disciples of Jesus as the Gospel of Barnabas mistakenly claims. Barnabas was the one who persuaded the apostles that Paul had changed from a persecutor of the church to a follower of Jesus (Acts 9:27). The true Barnabas was a missionary, telling the good news of Jesus (Acts 13:2).

Date of authorship: the Middle Ages
If the Gospel of Barnabas were written in the first century, it would have been quoted in other documents of the same time period. It is not cited, however, a single time in works of either the church fathers or Muslim clerics until the fifteenth century. Those who claim the early authorship of the Gospel of Barnabas may be referring to the Epistle of Barnabas—a first-century book, though not divinely inspired.

A reading of the Gospel of Barnabas clearly shows that it was written neither in Jesus’ time nor shortly thereafter, as alleged. It contains far too many historical errors. The Gospel of Barnabas contains quotations from Dante Alighieri, references to an edict from Pope Boniface, and descriptions of feudalism. Therefore, scholars place the date of authorship around the fifteenth century.

Legitimacy: full of errors
The descriptions of Palestine show that the author of the Gospel of Barnabas was not familiar with its geography. He alleged that Jesus sailed to Nazareth—an inland city.

The Gospel of Barnabas says that Jesus was born when Pilate was governor, but history records Pilate becoming governor in A.D. 26 or 27—long after Jesus’ birth.

Trustworthy scholars have exposed the Gospel of Barnabas as a counterfeit. Therefore, it cannot be trusted as the biography of Jesus’ life.

y-jesus.com/more/gbs-the-gospel-of-barnabas-secret-bible/4/

Christian writers such as Irenaeus wrote extensively about anti-Christian documents such as the Gnostic gospels, classifying them as heretical. Yet, not one of Ireneaus’ letters or documents mentions the Gospel of Barnabas. There is simply no mention of it from any early writer.

Perhaps most indicative of its late date is that the Gospel of Barnabas describes medieval life in Western Europe, as well as a 100-year Jubilee, which wasn’t declared until the fourteenth century. How would Barnabas or any first-century writer know such historical detail hundreds of years before it was declared?

Thank you for you information, and especially thank you for your patience and kindness.

 

[jediliz]

It’s a medieval forgery used by Muslims to try to prove that Christ was NOT crucified.

Please don’t fall for these things.

 

[Faith1960]

It’s a medieval forgery used by Muslims to try to prove that Christ was NOT crucified.

Please don’t fall for these things.

Thanks for your reply.

 

[jimkhong]

So it is fake or not? I’m

Sorry to be confusing. It is fake, likely written in Middle Ages. Today, only quoted by some Muslims when arguing against Christians

 

[jimkhong]

When I’m talking about the G o B, I mean the “secret bible” containing the G o B.

Muslims believe that the Christians and the Jews have falsified the written revelation given to them and that only the Quran is the unchanged authentic revelation of God. However they have a problem as the Bible came before the Quran and so could not have falsified the Quran. So, Muslims believe that there was an earlier written Bible that existed (given via Jesus) before the Bible that Christians currently use. Similarly with the Torah. There is of course no evidence that there was such an earlier Bible existed.

So, I think we will have to leave it with you what you wish to believe. You can follow what trained scholars tells us that there was no earlier secret Bible or hidden books etc or you can believe conspiracy theorists - who in this case have a self interest to promote Islam. If you were to read on the internet you will always find some ‘evidence’ - the test would be whether only one person provided the ‘evidence’ or has this been verified by the scientific community. (Bear in mind that if you read it in several websites it doesn’t mean there are several independent testimonies - it could be just one source repeatedly quoted).

In this age of instant experts (it used to be that you write a book to become an expert, now you just write a blog - even easier), there has been a multiplicity of theories out there, some of those could be attractive to people seeking some secret enlightenment not privy by others. My advice is the check the credentials of the author - they must have their material checked and verified by professional and trained scholars. I am not saying scholars who has spent years on their training are always right and self-taught researchers are always wrong - it is just the balance of probabilities. Who do you think is more likely to be right - the untrained person who thought things up but never submitted their findings for verification or an entire community of trained scholars whose worked is always counter-checked by his/her peers?

 

[Faith1960]

Muslims believe that the Christians and the Jews have falsified the written revelation given to them and that only the Quran is the unchanged authentic revelation of God. However they have a problem as the Bible came before the Quran and so could not have falsified the Quran. So, Muslims believe that there was an earlier written Bible that existed (given via Jesus) before the Bible that Christians currently use. Similarly with the Torah. There is of course no evidence that there was such an earlier Bible existed.

So, I think we will have to leave it with you what you wish to believe. You can follow what trained scholars tells us that there was no earlier secret Bible or hidden books etc or you can believe conspiracy theorists - who in this case have a self interest to promote Islam. If you were to read on the internet you will always find some ‘evidence’ - the test would be whether only one person provided the ‘evidence’ or has this been verified by the scientific community. (Bear in mind that if you read it in several websites it doesn’t mean there are several independent testimonies - it could be just one source repeatedly quoted).

In this age of instant experts (it used to be that you write a book to become an expert, now you just write a blog - even easier), there has been a multiplicity of theories out there, some of those could be attractive to people seeking some secret enlightenment not privy by others. My advice is the check the credentials of the author - they must have their material checked and verified by professional and trained scholars. I am not saying scholars who has spent years on their training are always right and self-taught researchers are always wrong - it is just the balance of probabilities. Who do you think is more likely to be right - the untrained person who thought things up but never submitted their findings for verification or an entire community of trained scholars whose worked is always counter-checked by his/her peers?

eden.co.uk/blog/secret-bible-under-scrutiny-p1551

 

[jimkhong]

eden.co.uk/blog/secret-bible-under-scrutiny-p1551

Faith 1960, I think you and us have very different ideas and definition of evidence. Better we let it rest.

 

[thistle]

eden.co.uk/blog/secret-bible-under-scrutiny-p1551

**THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS IS FAKE!!! **

Let it go or you will just make yourself miserable over meaningless things like this.