/lit/ - Literature

>>5296075
This isn't new. There's plenty of biblical apocrypha.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biblical_apocrypha
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Testament_apocrypha

>>5296075
>Jesus wasn’t actually crucified and doesn’t claim him to be the son of God, but instead a prophet

I've thought that all along.

wont changea nything

>>5296075
You should read up on the other gnostic texts. There's suppose to be a lot more of these heretical scriptures that survived burning by the church lying around somewhere. People say some of it is hidden in the secret library under the Vatican.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nag_Hammadi_library

>>5296275
Until non-Muslim authorities get a chance to examine it I'll remain skeptical. The Gospel of Barnabas has long been considered an Islamic or possibly Jewish forgery by Christian and secular historians.

>>5296365
>The Gospel of Barnabas has long been considered an Islamic or possibly Jewish forgery by Christian and secular historians.

That's what they want you to think.

Yes, let's accuse the man without whom there would BE no Christianity of being an impostor. Paul logged all those miles and toils for shits and grins!

>>5296443
Paul was a low level evangelist with weird, interesting ideas about the Christ that teetered on the edge of orthodoxy whose writings live on in the canon (despite being the only "apostle" to have never met Jesus) because the Romans crushed the Church in Jerusalem. Paul and his followers used the spiritual vacuum and omen to their advantage, to where he's the most prolific of all the apostles. This isn't hit on Paul's ideas or whatever, but that's basically what happened.

>>5296513
Paul preserved the Eucharist, though, which is the most important part of the Church. For that alone he deserves his place.

>the very first mention of the Gospel of Barnabas is from Ibrahim al-Taybili

> While describing how the Bible predicts Muhammad, he speaks of the "Gospel of Saint Barnabas where one can find the light"

Sounds legit

>In it, Jesus also predicts the birth of Prophet Muhammed, who founded Islam 700 years later.
Sounds legit

>>5296557
Surely the Eucharist was preserved by the practice of the early Church and the didache.

>TELL ALL MANUSCRIPT
>LEARN THE SEVEN SECRETS TO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN CHRISTIANS DON'T WANT YOU TO KNOW
>TEN OUT OF TEN RABBIS AGREE
>CLICK HERE FOR FREE BARNABAS TRIAL

>>5296600
>Jesus was the son of God
Sounds legit

>>5296589
>>5296600
>>5296607
Stop shitposting.

>>5296607
You may have my kekkles.

>>5296075
>>5296090
what non-christians don't understand about these non-canonical gospels is that they're basically fanfiction, which is of course why they deviate from the facts so significantly

the canonical gospels consist of three independently written accounts of the life of christ, all three of which agree with each other so completely and significantly that they must be historically true

the fourth canonical gospel (john) deviates slightly but this is only because it reveals secret knowledge that the disciples were taught

>>5296644
>fanfiction
the bible itself is fanfiction

>>5296644
There are only two gospels: Q and Mark.

>>5296075
>1,500 year old bible
>time of muhammad
>plenty of Islamic texts denied the crucifixion of Jesus
>suddenly other books say Jesus wasn't crucified
what a shock

>>5296075
are those metal clips fastening 1500yo papyrus?

>>5296607
st. hilarius of cécs

>>5296663
I'll bet the Gospel of Q would be an interesting read.

>>5296663
>Q document
>if real the most significant text in human history
>bound to be prized as absolutely sacred by the church
>somehow gets lost
>nobody in history has even heard of it
>no mention of the document in contemporaneous catalogs

cool story

>>5298005
>contemporaneous catalogues
Please show me the catalogue of 40CE subversive revolutionary writings?

>>5296075
Christians BTFO.

>>5297968
haha

>>5298005
>somehow gets lost
was Q ever in possession of contemporaries? i always thought it was the "greatest common ancestor" of sorts.

>>5296607
>CLICK HERE FOR FREE BARNABAS TRIAL

Laughed waaaaay harder than I should have.

>Barnabas is about the same length as the four canonical gospels put together, with the bulk being devoted to an account of Jesus' ministry, much of it harmonized from accounts also found in the canonical gospels. In some key respects, it conforms to the Islamic interpretation of Christian origins and contradicts the New Testament teachings of Christianity.

>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 (perhaps Gnostic,[2] Ebionite[3] or Diatessaronic[4]), redacted to bring it more in line with Islamic doctrine.

>oh a new gospel that claims jesus was only a prophet and not divine, almost certainly a later fake, better look it up
>yep
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/23/vatican-requests-1500-year-old-bible-from-turkey_n_1296672.html
>In it, Jesus is said to have predicted the coming of the Prophet Muhammad.

>>5296844
probably velum

The Gospel of Barnabas contradicts both the Bible and the Qur'an.

>>5298575
And it's unclear whether *that* Barnabas was the one who wrote it.

>>5296099
That's muslim propaganda.

>>5298583
No it isn't

It isn't even unclear whether the canonical gospels were written by their namesakes

I'm going to bite your forehead

>>5298575

Is that because it's gnostic so of course?

>>5296620
Y...you too.

>>5296644
>what non-christians don't understand about these non-canonical gospels is that they're basically fanfiction, which is of course why they deviate from the facts so significantly

That's true in the case of Barnabas but there's evidence that the Gospel of Thomas is actually the oldest, or at least dates to around the same time, as the four canonical gospels.

Thomas doesn't really have any startling revelations that would turn Christianity on its head though, it's just a collection of Jesus quotes.

I remember seeing this a year or so ago.

As far as, no paleographer or archaeologists have examined it and we only have the Turkish government and the same picture as a source that it even exists.

There probably is a manuscript and the Turkish government is just saying "HURR IT'S AN OLD VERSION OF THE GOSPEL OF BARNABAS" even though it probably doesn't say anything like that. Wouldn't be surprised.

I don't know why so many Muslims I know rely on the Gospel of Barnabas when it clearly contradicts Islam in some places and we have no way of verifying how old it is. I'm pretty sure most of them have never even read it or even the wikipedia article on it. Plus, it's not like it's an article of faith that Judas died on the cross and not Jesus. It's just one reading of a passage in the Qu'ran. I've been told and read it was one of Jesus' companions who died on the cross in his place for example.

Some people just are desperate to feel validated I guess.

>>5298699

Well, the main problem with the Gospel of Thomas is that some of the parallels with the canonical sayings in it are worded differently in a way that alters the meaning to feel more "gnostic." It was mainly the fact that it was loved by gnostic groups due to its emphasis knowledge of the meaning of the hidden sayings of Christ as the means to salvation and that was problematic for the early orthodox position that was developing which as we all know is that it was Christ's death and subsequent resurrection and faith in these things that brought salvation to everyone, high and low, not just those elites who were "in the know."

This article's nothing but sensationalist clickbait. The Gospel of Barnabas isn't new and there's no reason to believe it and especially its most deviant parts represent early or historically probable traditions. The article also shoots itself in the foot when it claims the Catholic Church set up the Biblical Canon at Nicea. That's not what happened; Nicea was solely to determine whether Arian or (now) orthodox Christology was sound.