The Gospel of Barnabas

Nan, is it possible today to find copies of Original Gospels in Hebrew?

Are they still rejected?

Mohamed, I did not learn that in the Council of Nicea it was ordered that original Gospels in Hebrew be destroyed. I have never heard of that before.

You have titled your topic The Gospel of Barnabas,

Now a manuscript written in Italian in the 16th century would not be included in the original Catholic canon, it would not yet exist.

I have never heard of it before. It is not part of the Bible we know or accept.

epigraphical: epigraphy (the study and interpretation of ancient inscriptions)

I think some scholars may believe this was a work written by someone in the 16th century who wanted to connect Jesus with a prediction of the coming of Muhammad.

No matter what the manuscript was meant to be, it would not have anything to do with Hebrew writings ordered destroyed at the Council of Nicea.

Mohamed, you quoted:

In 325 C.E., the Nicene Council was held, where it was ordered that all original Gospels in Hebrew script should be destroyed. An Edict was issued that any one in possession of these Gospels will be put to death.

Where did you get that?

here it say same thing

May be because it was included in the list of Apocryphal books.

In fact, it is known that the Pope secured a copy of the Gospel of Barnabas in 383 A.D. and kept it in his private library.

btw does The doctrine of the Trinity exist in both Bible the THE DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION (Catholic) and the REVISED STANDARD VERSION (Anglican)

Okay, thank you Mohamed!

First to answer your question at the end of your post:

btw does The doctrine of the Trinity exist in both Bible the THE DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION (Catholic) and the REVISED STANDARD VERSION (Anglican)?

YES! The Trinity is the central belief of Christianity: We believe in GOD the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit: God in Three Persons

Here is the Anglican version of the Nicene Creed:

You can see the Holy Trinity in the wording of the Creed. This creed comes directly from the original Catholic version, written in 325 AD at Nicea.

I am now reading the page on the History of Gospel of Barnabas, and I will tell you what I think about all this in my next post.

Thank you to you too Nan

and me have unfortunately to go to work, first thing when i return inshaallah turn on my PC like always :)

Thank you again for your time and tell me more about the list of Apocryphal books.

Mohamed, this is a complete list of all Biblical apocrypha books, both Old and New Testaments,

You will see that in the New Testament index there are four manuscripts for Barnabas! I had not known that!

And here I have found an essay and complete text of the Gospel of Barnabas, which is considered a false work, and which agrees neither with the Bible nor the Quran,

Now here is the Epistle of Barnabas, which on the other hand is considered to be an authentic work, written between 70 AD and 135 AD,

Looks like we are close to solving the mystery of Barnabas.

I can't find any mention in the authentic Epistle of Barnabas of Jesus proclaiming that he himself is not the messiah, or that another prophet is coming, and the text seems to be in accordance with both Old and New Testaments of the Catholic Bible.

+

wich show at least that "It was made or created by Muslims" is Wrong!

but still the Gospel of Barnabas say that Jesus (pbuh) was not the Son of God, that he was not crucified, and that he foretold the coming of Muhammad (pbuh ) wich agree with Qur'an

apocrypha books mean hidden!

Why hidden? Doesnt that demonstrate that the Bible has been corrupted?

Dont think so! may this help

and Nan dont you think we must begin by enquiring who the man Barnabas really was?

Good Mohamed, this is very interesting!

wich show at least that "It was made or created by Muslims" is Wrong

Yes, at least not a forgery or a lie created by Muslims, it must have been created by a Christian in Italy in the 16th century, who intended to make people believe it was part of the body of work by the original Barnabas.

I don't think any true and believing Muslim would resort to such a deception anyway. It is not in the character of pious Muslims.

These are excerpts from the article you have posted,

It was effectively the end of the Crusades. The Muslims had won.

It is supposed to be the long-lost narrative of miracles and doctrines given to Barnabas by Matthew

We must conclude that someone, at some point, has composed a body of heretical literature in Barnabas' name, which literature attempts to establish legitimacy from Ignatius, bishop of Antioch, and conforms to the literature supposedly travelling with Barnabas the Apostle.

You asked,

apocrypha books mean hidden!

Why hidden? Doesnt that demonstrate that the Bible has been corrupted?

No, not corrupted.  When the scholars at Nicea in the 4th century chose the manuscripts that should be included in the first Catholic canon (the books that would compose the first Bible), they carefully compared many documents (see the list of apocrypha scriptures) and selected only those that made sense in a comprehensive whole, without contradiction. 

This took years to do, and it was very painstaking work for the scholars, who had to translate hundreds of writings and compare them all.

See this,

This does not mean the original collated Bible was corrupted, it means that this was the process Constantine's scholars used to compose the Bible.

By the time Jerome translated the complete Bible into LATIN and it became the Vulgate, it was set in tradition, it had become the Roman Catholic Bible, and nothing more was supposed to be added after that.

They did not discard the writing that were left out, they composed them into the apocrypha, and set them aside from the people, to be studied only by scholars of future times.

*edit (I have added my own comment here): as for the burning of "heretical material" on threat of death to anyone possessing such writings - yes! - those writings in the possession of commoners were considered illegal and were probably destroyed whenever they were found, and the offender punished, tortured or killed in the name of survival of the new Roman Catholic Church.

This is simply the history of the beginning of Christianity (Roman Catholicism).

Thank you for your testimony

but complex! Compiled and this long list of apocrypha, then many versions of Bible, and many revision ...

Dont know if you read Chapter Mary ( meriem peace be upon her ) in my other thread because so long!

I would to share with you that verses :

Qur'an Al A'raf 7:157

"Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in the Taurat and the Injil..."

Qur'an Al Saff 61:6

"...Jesus, the son of Mary said: 'O children of Israel! I am the apostle of Allah (sent) to you, confirming the Taurat (which came) before me and giving glad tidings of an apostle to come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad'."

Does anyone know hebrew here to join discussion?

I did have discussed that before with A jew student but her parent were not both Jew and they didnt have a hebrew version ...

plz read that http://www.jews-for-allah.org/Muhammad-and...ad-in-Songs.htm

Good Mohamed!

While you were writing your last post, did you refresh your page at least once?
I revised what I wrote because it was mess and the quote tags were wrong. Then I added a few comments at the end.

Now you say,

but complex! Compiled and this long list of apocrypha, then many versions of Bible, and many revision ...

Haha! I should have change the word "simply" to "complex"!

It was a long and arduous task to compose the Bible to be set in Catholic tradition for all time, and very complicated since there were so many writings to chose from.

But it is rather like a scholar who has the task of writing a thesis for his doctrate degree. He will have to study many, many sourses and then compose a draft of his manuscript, then edit and revise it, so that it makes sense and with as few contraditions as possible.

This takes years of work, very difficult!

The point is, that once the Latin Vulgate was composed, Roman Catholicism was then set in tradition, and all churches of the Roman Empire were to present the Liturgy according to the canon.

Nothing more was supposed to be added. But in later centuries, various documents have appeared (such as the controversial Gospel of Barnabas) and when studied by scholars and shown to be contradictory to the original Catholic canon, they are considered false.

Note! Remember that the 1st century Epistle of Barnabas is considered to be authentic, and written by the real apostle Barnabas.

Then there was the "corruption" to the Bible in later centuries!
Since the Reformation and the emergence of Protestantism, and the spread to the New World (America) Christianity continues to change, and original truths are being twisted and confused and falsified. This worries me greatly!

These changes were bound to happen to Christianity once the Catholic Bible had got into the hands of the common people (starting with Martin Luther and others), and translated into every language of the world! Now in today's world no one can agree on which is the true faith of Christianity, and Catholicism has been receding into the distance and considered corrupted and outdated.

My view is the opposite, that Roman Catholicism was and still is the true religion of Christianity.

Yes I did read the Chaper of Mary (from the Quran) and it was very beautiful.

This is a good and productive (even scholarly) discussion, Mohamed, and I hope to continue. There is a great deal of material to be discovered and understood about our two religions and how they compare with each other, and compliment each other.

Havent refresh was impatient to read your post haha

I hope too and i should...

I need to save that and to read it again and again because my english i may miss somethings but inshaallah we will bring more info about all that and i wish other members join the discussion ...

Well, have you refreshed your page now, and have you re-read my long post above? I fixed it all so it makes sense and the quotes are correct.

ps - to answer about the Hebrew!

I don't know anyone who knows Hebrew! I am sorry. And I don't know if we have any members here who know theology or who are interested in it.

I just happen to know a great deal because I have studied theology, and because I know how to research what I don't know.

By the way Mohamed, your English is now good enough that we can have a discussion and we can understand each other. You have done well in your studies of English!

... have to go now .. talk soon inshaallah .. take care Nan

Nan and Mohamed I love the wonderful debate you are both having in this thread, wish I could join in but haven't got a clue what you are both talking about, enjoy

Kiwi , with Nan we have been simply saying on here and the other thread

http://littleozzybloke.com/lobdc1/index.php?showtopic=19938

That The old Testament ( The Hebrew Bible, or the TORAH, or the TANAKA ) and The New Testament ( The Aramaic GOSPEL (or) THE SYNOPTIC GOSPELS ) were collated (collected and put together, rearranged) by men (Constantine's scholars in 325 AD at Nicea ) with a long list of apocrypha books set aside from the people ( such as the controversial Gospel of Barnabas wich say that Jesus (pbuh) was not the Son of God, that he was not crucified, and that he foretold the coming of Muhammad (pbuh ) wich agree with Qur'an), … Then the Bible was translated by an other man to give The Roman Catholic Latin Vulgate then re-translated ( by men ) to modern-day translation :

English King James Version, which was written in 1616 AD in England

THE DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION for Catholic …

REVISED STANDARD VERSION for Anglican…

R.S.V. 1971 ( page iii, paragraph six of the PREFACE say "YET THE KING JAMES VERSION HAS GRAVE DEFECTS." And, "THAT THESE DEFECTS ARE SO MANY AND SO SERIOUS AS TO CALL FOR REVISION . . .")

And so many other modern-day "Bible-church denominations"
……..
……..

So with so many versions of Bible, and many revision, in today's world no one can agree on which is the true faith of Christianity…

What make it Complex for The Christians! Contrary to us because as Muslims we believe in the Bible as corrupted by men!! btw that’s not all, we believe in Jesus (pbuh) as:

* A true messenger of God;
* Prophet of God;
* Miracle birth without human intervention;
* He was the ‘Christ’ or Messiah as predicted in the Bible;
* He is with God now and most important;
* He will be coming back in the Last Days to lead the believers against the ‘Antichrist.

And have been saying also that as Christians you may not know that the Qur'an is perfectly preserved and protected from human tampering.

I believe that any Christian who believes Jesus (pbuh) is the Messiah, and believes that books were sent down by God, then surely he should take into account what he just read here, and consider the Qur'an!

Hi again, Mohamed, and welcome back to this thread!

Let me answer quickly for now, and I may have more to say later.

The authentic "true" Bible was the Latin Vulgate, of the 4th century AD.
(The Catholic DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION comes directly from the Vulgate)

The "true" version of Christianity was (and is) Roman Catholicism, in its original foundation as set down with the Nicene Creed in 325 AD.

All those in today's world who aren't sure which is "true" Christianity, it is Catholicism.

The Bible in its original form the Vulgate, was (and is) the Word of God, as given to men a little at a time over many generations, and became the foundation of the truth for all time.

"For He hath spoken through the prophets."

Mohamed, I don't believe that God would suddenly dictate ALL of the truth to just one man.
A wise and logical God would entrust some of the truth to some of the men, revealing the truth gradually, over many centuries and generations.
And those were the centuries and generations prior to - before - the 4th century AD.

For we are in the image of God, in his heart and mind, in him we have our being, and as the universe and the earth evolve through space and time, so do the minds of men, in accordance with the mind of God.

+

ty Nan

of course its so serious, and as you said

plz open chapter 37 in the "Book of Isaiah." http://www.catholicdoors.com/bible/isaias.htm

AND THEN

2 KINGS 19 http://www.catholicdoors.com/bible/4kings.htm

Isaiah 37 and 2 Kings 19 are identical word for word. Yet they have been attributed to two different authors, centuries apart.

i think even you will find the same in every Version!

Plz check your Bibles!

Mohamed, yes there is a reason why the same text is included twice in the Bible (both books in the Old Testament).

Go here to this chart, and you will see which books of the Bible are classified according to which type and kind, and according to the meaning and the message.

http://demo.lutherproductions.com/bibletut.../books/menu.htm

The text of Isaiah is included as an inspired work of a major prophet, while the same text is incuded again as an historial passage, 2 Kings.

So the same text may be understood twice, according to two different perspectives: the word of a major prophet, and as a literary work of historical significance.

The first Roman Catholic bishops understood the significance, and this was one of many reasons why the original Latin Vulgate was spoken only by the clergy, and kept away from the common people; because only the clergy who were scholars could interpret.

The Liturgy of the Word was then presented to the people by the bishops at High Holy Mass (Eucharist). It was not the place of the common people to question the liturgy or the catholic canon; it was the word of God.

They were right. As far as I am concerned, the corruption and dilution of Christianity came after the Protestant Reformation, and the spread of many different bibles to the common people of every country in the world.

This was a mistake, because ordinary people are not smart enough to interpret the original.

+

great to see a serious religious discussion.As a non believer in ANY organised religion it is good to actually see different faiths discussing and not arguing.Keep it up ,i am not well enough informed on the topic to join in.

Yes ok Thank you for the link, it explain the word " rearranged "

according to two different perspectives: the word of a major prophet, and as a literary work of historical significance.

Nan, Literary Work of Historical significance ! But we are talking about Word of God.

then there are three different kinds of witnessing in the Bible ( s )

1/ "The Word of God."

2/ what are described as the " Work ( Words ) of a Prophet of God."

3/ "Work (Words) of a Historian"

Nan, I have every right to demand : Which Bible are you holding now?

THE DOUAY-RHEIMS TRANSLATION for Catholic or REVISED STANDARD VERSION for Anglican.

and if the books are rearraged with same manner.

Mohamed,

Inspired work of a prophet means: inspired written work of a prophet; having received (part of) the word of God through the Holy Spirit, and having written it down in words at the time he was living.

You must remember that Christianity bloomed like a slow flower, over centuries, in the fullness of time.

Literary passage of historical significance means: repetition of the same passage (having been inspired by the Holy Spirit) to be applied within the context of history; the word of God as having been passed on through the generations.

I cannot explain it any more clearly. I think you are confusing what you may have learned of the Christianity of today's world with the foundations of the religion as it was in the 4th century.

Christianity these days is not the same, it has been altered since the Reformation; in my own words, it is not the real thing anymore. There were layers of meaning ("witnessing") in the original which have been lost today, and replaced by false witness.

But remember, I can't explain all of theology and historical Christianity to you on a discussion forum, this is very difficult.

One more answer: yes the Bible is arranged the same way in both the Douay and the RSV translations; remember that neither one of these was ever associated with the defective King James.

+

Ok yes Nan because i have to leave but i will have inshaallah more questions later ...

first i didnt find the Gospel of Barnabas and all that long list of apocrypha books mean on

http://demo.lutherproductions.com/bibletut.../books/menu.htm

Also i wish you give me link for the RSV

Its an opurtunity for all of us here on fbd to learn a little ... THIS IS SO IMPORTANT!
and we have chance Nan is with us, know YOU have other responsabilities on fbd but this is so important Nan ty

Mohamed, I have deleted my last post overnight because I think some information I gave was wrong. Here is a new post instead.


It's my understanding of religious matters that most people either believe in God or they don't believe.

Most people have no interest in where it all came from. I'm one who happens to be interested in the origins of both major religions, Chrstianity and Islam, from an historical perspective which is set apart from personal belief.

Christianity claims more than 5,300 known Greek manuscripts of the New Testament, 10,000 Latin Vulgates and at least 9,300 other early versions, adding up to over 24,000 New Testament manuscripts still in existence, most of which were written between 25-400 years after the death of Christ (or between the 1st and 5th centuries).


I have mentioned before on the board that I do not believe that either religion came into existence by supernatural ("divine") revelation or intervention. I believe that the latter religion ultimately arose from influence from the former religion.

I believe that all three Abrahamic religions came from the minds of human beings (men) as inspired by the Holy Spirit revealing parts of the truth slowly, over centuries and generations;

and I believe that Christianity arose out of Judaism; and that Islam arose (at least in part and because of some influence between the 7th and the 9th centuries AD) from Christianity.

Go here to an academic paper written by historians, about the origins of the Quran, with information about both the Quran and the Bible,

http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/debate/part1.htm


To summarize our debate in this thread so far:

The Gospel of Barnabas was a fake from medieval Italy. Its author suggested that Jesus foretold of Muhammad, but the author would already have known of Islam by medieval times, and he could write anything he wanted; it was well after the fact.
Jesus did not deny he was the Son of God or foretell the coming of Muhammad, and there is no question among scholars that he was crucified.

The history of Bible translations is much more complicated than I can write about here. It is very easy to get the wrong information. I have learned some theology but am not an historian.

To give you the informtion you wanted,

Here are the links to the Revised Standard Version
(also see the shortened standard list of accepted books of apocrypha included)

http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/
http://quod.lib.umich.edu/r/rsv/browse.html

(don't confuse this one with the King James, New International, or New Revised)

+

Ok just checked the Revised Standard Version, Isa.37 and 2Kgs.19 are identical word for word!

I can not find the Gospel of Barnabas on apocrypha books RSV !

Nan, are you telling me that there are such Bibles!! Please what is the source of this information.

also the source of that long list of apocrypha books where there The Gospel of Barnabas is mentioned.

How? and they are all called Bible!

There are hundreds, even thousands of other references that show how the Judeo-Christian Bible came into existence.

Mohamed, it would take me months or even years to find all the sourses for you, and of course I can't do that.

Yes! All the manuscripts and fragments preserved from the 1st to 4th centuries AD were read and translated by scholars carefully, to create the frst Catholic Bible, and it took decades to do it.

If you were to research your own Quran you would also find information about the earlier influences that helped to shape and define your religiion Islam.

You would have to start from the beginning and learn the origins of Judaism and then Christianity, as a scholar would learn, and that takes many years of study.
Your questions are too simple; you are a devout believer in the Quran, and you believe it was a divine revelation to a single man. But I do not believe that.

There isn't any more I can tell you. The Gospel of Barnabas was never very important, it was an obsure manuscript and has been rejected by Christian historians.

The apocrypha has been greatly simplified. The Latin Vulgate of the 4th century is standard Catholic Christianity. We move on from there.

As for Islam, your religion came some three to five centuries later. I am still learning about it, but from an academic viewpoint of study, and not from the standpoint of belief.

Mohamed, please have a look at the academic document I cited in my post above,

http://debate.org.uk/topics/history/debate/part1.htm

+

Saving a copy ( or trying to save, because of slow connection i need time to open a page! )

By sources i meant the link ... The Gospel of Barnabas is in that list of apocrypha books you quoted.

Plz what was the link!

Nan, i am and was avoiding to give my opinion, i am trying to analyse facts, in our case its The Bible of today and her origin.

We will have inshaallah also " Is the Qur'an Word of Allah" thread if some one is interested!

Plz dont forget i believe in Taurat and Injeel and i should respect The Bible.

And i think you said that the other version(s) of the Bible not to mention The Vulgate translated, are corrupted!

That is to progress in our knowledge about The Bible.

The Gospel of Barnabas is a fake. But here I have found the link to the original long list of the aprocrypha, which does include it,

http://www.interfaith.org/christianity/apocrypha/

The Epistle of Barnabas is the real thing, an authentic document from the 1st century, and it has no resemblance whatsoever to the Italian medieval "Gospel" of Barnabas.

I have explained the origins of the Bible, written from thousands of early manscripts, yes by men. The first Vulgate in the late 4th century was the REAL Bible, and even though it was compiled from translations of thousands of manuscripts, it was NOT corrupted.

This is our religion. I suspect that your Quran also arose and came into existence in a similar way, over several centuries, long after the establishment of Christianity.

I already know that you will not agree with this, Mohamed, but ALL religions are man-made; religions influence each other over centuries, and newer similar religions always arise from older similar religions.

I have explained the apocrypha, the list was was much longer in the 4th century, and has been reduced to only a few books now.

Historians preserve the early documents and study them, but they are not what is preached in the churches and it is not our concern anymore.

Bibles became corrupted (changed, altered, re-interpreted) during the Reformation to modern times, 1500-1900 AD.

If you want more information all you have to do is "google" for pages and pages of sourses, and then study them.

I must go, Salaam!

And as if to prove my point about the long and complicated history of the Bible, here is a new article I found today on CNN,


Oldest known Bible goes online

Handwritten Codex Sinaiticus is more than 1,600 years old
Includes two books not part of official New Testament
Discovered in a monastery in Sinai desert in Egypt more than 160 years ago
Scholar named Constantine Tischendorf recognized its significance in 1844

* This is it! The Codex Sinaiticus was the master text from which the Latin Vulgate (first Roman Catholic Bible) was written, and all other Bibles in the world, in all languages, came after that.

As you can see Mohamed, the authentic Epistle of Barnabas was included, but not the much more recent false medieval Italian "gospel" of Barnabas (anyway to include it in the 4th century would have been impossible since it was not written yet)

I think the correct was to say The Qur'an.

When i said please check your Bible : I asked the other members to help checking about Isa.37 and 2Kgs.19 , if they are identical word for word in their own Bible because there are different versions!

The Quran also arose and came into existence in a similar way This is wrong!

Its right about me

Islam does not claim to be a new religion but rather to be a re-expression in its final form of the true religion ofAlmighty God, Allah, as it was originally revealed to Adam and subsequent prophets.

btw please take note :

Oh yes!

about proof