The Gospel of Barnabus

[Central Asian Qaghan]

I've recently come into a copy of this Gospel and while having read the Bible, this was given to me as a reading assignment for one of my Islamic PhD Courses. And frankly it is interesting. Produced from findings in Italian and Spanish (which were later lost) it depicts Islam and the coming of Mohammad (PBUH) and tells that Jesus was a prophet and not a son of God. It is quite interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

[Col. Tartleton]

Yeah but I concluded that from reading the regular gospels:

Jesus was a dude.
Jesus thought he was a prophet.
Other people thought he was a prophet.
In accordance to Truthiness that means he was a prophet.
Although:
Jesus was a dude.
Jesus thought there was a God.
Other people think there is a God.
Thus there is a God.

Unfortunately for religion, commonly held beliefs are not automatically equivalent to true.

[Trey]

Given that it is not canonical, I wouldn't pay it much heed.
Furthermore,

"This Gospel is considered by the majority of academics, including Christians and some Muslims (such as Abbas el-Akkad) to be late and pseudepigraphical;[1] however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work edited to conform to Islam, perhaps Gnostic[2] or Ebionite[3] or Diatessaronic.[4] Some Muslims consider the surviving versions as transmitting a suppressed apostolic original. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus."

But have fun.

[Angrychris]

so you wouldnt recommend it?

[Central Asian Qaghan]

I would consider them worth reading since there are a lot of books that were rejected from the bible. Mostly I have to rely on second hand translations as I don't speak Italian, Greek or Spanish but they are interesting.

[basics]

" I would consider them worth reading since there are a lot of books that were rejected from the bible. Mostly I have to rely on second hand translations as I don't speak Italian, Greek or Spanish but they are interesting. "

Central Asian Qaghan,

No, what you should say is that when the books that were to be of the Bible were being analysed the one quoted along with others were deemed not to be of God and salvation. Looked at that way there is no ambiguity like that which you suggest. So my friend whatever piece of paper you achieve will never ever replace what knowing Jesus Christ is. The sad fact is that it will take you further from God for which His Law will eventually have to deal with.

[Central Asian Qaghan]

So my friend whatever piece of paper you achieve will never ever replace what knowing Jesus Christ is. The sad fact is that it will take you further from God for which His Law will eventually have to deal with.

I'm a Muslim and you can take your chirstian posts out of it if you don't like what I have to say or don't want to join your polytheistic cult.

[removeduser_487563287433]

I'm a Muslim and you can take your chirstian posts out of it if you don't like what I have to say or don't want to join your polytheistic cult.

Actually no he can say whatever he likes and you're not allowed to do anything about it.

[Central Asian Qaghan]

Actually no he can say whatever he likes and you're not allowed to do anything about it.

Sure he can, doesn't stop me from saying that I have no intension of joining his polythesitic cult and replying so. Ain't freedom of speech grand?

[The Dude]

I'm a Muslim and you can take your chirstian posts out of it if you don't like what I have to say or don't want to join your polytheistic cult.

He is allowed to say whatever he likes, as Ferrets already pointed out. You however, are also allowed to pick up a book and educate yourself rather than play the role of fundamentalist beardman every day.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Yeah those that were written hundreds of years after the original gospels. Irrelevant.

Edit: Maybe this is what Mohamed based his Quran on. Much of Islam is very akin to Nestorianism and of course Arianism.

[Central Asian Qaghan]

Yeah those that were written hundreds of years after the original gospels. Irrelevant.

Edit: Maybe this is what Mohamed based his Quran on. Much of Islam is very akin to Nestorianism and of course Arianism.

The question arises where are these from. Since I'm no religious student I have no "religious" interest in these. As a historian, especially of Islamic history, this is indeed interested enough. When were they written since only one translation existed.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Several hundred years after the original gospels which is why they were excluded.

[MathiasOfAthens]

Barnabus just sounds fake. Like the name was made up.

Regardless, the students studying this compared the writing to the writing style of Old Italian or Old Spanish. Both would put its origin after Muhammad so this guy who wrote this did not predict Muhammad and he certainly didnt know Jesus.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas#Origins

[maerd2003]

do christians (or some) beleive that jesus is god's son (or jesus is god)? there are so many voices on it, some say we do, some say dont..
anyway, christians beleiving in one god (actually everyone beleiving in one true god- do not commit shirk) is not so different from a muslim, from an islamic viewpoint. so fabricating(if its so, and if its done by muslims as claimed) such gospels are just stupid and unnecessary.

[Dr. Oza]

Several hundred years after the original gospels which is why they were excluded.

Who chose the original gospels?

A bunch of old white romans under the watchful eye of semi-paganic emperor Constantine.

What happened the other gospels?

Burned, hunted and destroyed.

Forgetting Barnabus, the gospels of the NT , cannot be accepted absolutely as what Jesus would have wanted, because , well.. ehm.. Jesus kind was dead by then.

[Carpathian Wolf]

Who chose the original gospels?

A bunch of old white romans under the watchful eye of semi-paganic emperor Constantine.

What happened the other gospels?

Burned, hunted and destroyed.

Forgetting Barnabus, the gospels of the NT , cannot be accepted absolutely as what Jesus would have wanted, because , well.. ehm.. Jesus kind was dead by then.

They were accepted by those who martyred the faith. Constantine wasn't semi pagan, i'm not sure he really cared nor was he a theologian. The gospels were chosen based on proximity of the Apostles and how they related to one another.

I've seen Dan Brown movies too.

[Mythos]

Who chose the original gospels?

A bunch of old white romans under the watchful eye of semi-paganic emperor Constantine.

Stop getting your history lessons from Dan Brown. The list of canonical gospels had been more or less the same for at least 150 years before Nicaea. There were differences in what various people in the hierarchy of the church regarded as canonical but these minor and they were about peripheral works like the Apocalypse.

What happened the other gospels?

Burned, hunted and destroyed.

You have to realise that books were not printed by the millions. It was a painstaking process to write a book once, much less write it again and again. The bible (the canonical bible that is) was reproduced because there was much demand for it, while the various non-canonical gospels were not, therefore people did not bother that much to copy them.

[chilon]

Who chose the original gospels?

A bunch of old white romans under the watchful eye of semi-paganic emperor Constantine.

I think it started earlier with Paul long before Constantine.

[Col. Tartleton]

The only reason I believe in a Joshua of Nazareth is because I must as I believe in Socrates and Zoroaster. Not what they said so much as that they spoke. Did the Romans execute some disruptive Rabbis? Of course. Was one of them a certain Joshua? I imagine so. Was he the son of God? No more than you or I. Was he a prophet? Is Nostradamus a prophet or a deluded occultist? I can't say for certain.