In some of our discussions with Muslim friends, the topic of the Gospel of Barnabas came up. Some say the Gospel of Barnabas is the true Injil (New Testament). Yet, there are six issues with the Gospel of Barnabas which Muslims are not aware of. If they were, they will not be very quick to claim it is the genuine Injil.

What are the reasons we cannot use this in preaching the truth and accept it as the Word of God?

1. In the Gospel of Barnabas, Jesus did not consider himself the Messiah, but said Muhammad is the Messiah:

Jesus confessed : ‘I am not the Messiah … I am indeed sent to the house of Israel as a prophet of salvation; but after me shall come the Messiah’. (The Gospel of Barnabas, , 96:2-3,  97:6)

When the prayer was ended, the priest said with a loud voice: `Stay, Jesus, for we need to know who thou art, for the quieting of our nation.’ Jesus answered: `I am Jesus, son of Mary, of the seed of David, a man that is mortal and feareth God, and I seek that to God be given honour and glory.’ The priest answered: `In the book of Moses it is written that our God must send us the Messiah, who shall come to announce to us that which God willeth, and shall bring to the world the mercy of God. Therefore I pray thee tell us the truth, art thou the Messiah of God whom we expect?’Jesus answered: `It is true that God hath so promised, but indeed I am not he, for he is made before me, and shall come after me.’

Jesus answered: `The name of the Messiah is admirable, for God himself gave him the name when he had created his soul, and placed it in a celestial splendour. God said: “Wait Mohammed; for thy sake I will to create paradise, the world, and a great multitude of creatures, whereof I make thee a present, insomuch that whoso bless thee shall be blessed, and whoso shall curse thee shall be accursed. When I shall send thee into the world I shall send thee as my messenger of salvation, and thy word shall be true, insomuch that heaven and earth shall fail, but thy faith shall never fail.” Mohammed is his blessed name.’

2. The Gospel of Barnabas says Jesus was born while Pilate was governor (3:1). Pilate was governor when Jesus was 30 years old, not when he was born.

Early manuscripts do not exist. The Italian translation may be as old as 1400 CE which is the earliest possible date for its genesis. There were no early copies and references before the 1500’s CE.

3. The Gospel of Barnabas is not a true Gospel

There are two historical issues in the Gospel of Barnabas. It maintains Jesus sailed to Nazareth from Galilee but Nazareth was not on the seashore but inland (20:1).

In Chapter 20, Nazareth was on the shore of Lake Galilee.  Nazareth is a town approximately 20 km away from the Lake.

4. There is no evidence of this gospel’s existence prior to the late sixteenth century.

The question is: why must we not use the Gospel of Barnabas to prove the Truth?

According to Dr. Darrell Bock, a Renowned  New Testament Scholar, “Because it is a late work. Not even first century.”

It is true that “Gospel of Barnabas” mentions Allah and Muhammad.  The problem is the universal conclusion of scholars who studies said document found out it was written about 1500 years after Jesus lived and almost 1000 years after Muhammad lived.

5. The Gospel of Barnabas was written by a Muslim and not an orthodox.

If this was used by anti-Christians, we know our Muslim brothers disagree with Christian beliefs.

We know Islam defenders use this often to defend their faith.

6.  Jesus Predicted the Coming of Muhammad by Name

Jesus declared the coming of Muhammad as in a statement made after he said he would first endure the infamy that he was crucified: “But when Mohammed comes, the blessed messenger of God, that disgrace will be eliminated” (Gospel of Barnabas, paragraph 112).

These are a few crucial Islamic features of the Gospel of Barnabas where the teaching disagrees with the four Biblical Gospels. Some other Islamic influences are seen in this book. There is the solemn promise to Abraham was made in Ishmael and not Isaac (paragraph 191). This explains the Muslim belief that this is the only true Gospel.

1,500 Year Old Bible Says That Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified?

news

If you will conduct a research, you will discover that this is a big lie. 

This astonishing finding is most likely a deception. It can be the handiwork of a forger.

This artifact resembles forgery which is not close to the 1,500-year old claim.

Where authentic articles during that generation were made of parchment and ink, this is unclean and recycled leather

The publication details go back to 1500 AD. It may not be correct to say that it is 1500 years old. This would not be possible as the vowel system did not exist during that time. It may not be true even if that was the case.

This is what we will read and it is how it was translated in English.

fake

One thing is certain. This was written in the year 1500 AD. The Book is certainly not 1500 years old!

The Khabouris Codex dates back to the 12th century. The codex may be or not but the bottom line is the Khabouris Codex is still older.

If we analyze the original text in the oldest Aramaic manuscript, was it written that Jesus  was crucified?

The answer is yes!

You can read in the screenshot a part of Matthew 28:5 in the Khabouris Codex.

aramaicmanuscript

 

Advertisements