Why have Christians hidden the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’?

---

 

I well remember one of my first conversations with a Muslim. This is what he said:

 

‘The Church has hidden the ‘Gospel of Barnabas!’ It was part of the Injil until the Council of Nicea in AD. 325. But since then the church has suppressed it! If you read it you’ll see that Jesus foretold the coming of Muhammad. It is the only true record of the life of Jesus Christ. Christians have hidden the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ because it shows that Jesus was the prophet Islam declares Him to be.’

 

Maybe you have heard or said something like this yourself? I had never heard of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ so I couldn’t answer my Muslim friend. ‘You see,’ he said, ‘your ignorance of it proves that the Church has suppressed it.’

 

I wanted to know whether or not this ‘Gospel’ was reliable, so I found a copy and began to study it. Here is a summary of what I discovered.

 

I. The history of the ‘Barnabas Gospel’

 

In 1734 George Sale published an English translation of the Qur’an. He mentioned a ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ in the introduction. Sale said there was a Spanish translation (which no longer exists apart from a few known extracts), and an Italian translation which was kept in the library of Prince Eugene of Savoy.

 

The preface of the Italian version said that a Roman Catholic monk, Fra Marino (1590), found the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ in the library of Pope Sixtus V. The monk quickly took the book, read it and converted to Islam.

 

Sale wrote that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ records the life of Jesus very differently from the four Biblical Gospels. It corresponds to the Qur’an and Hadith in several ways:

 

- Jesus’ denial that He was the Son of God (Gospel of Barnabas, para.70);

- Judas crucified in place of Jesus (Gospel of Barnabas, para.116);

- Jesus predicting the coming of Muhammad (Gospel of Barnabas, para.112).

 

Sale did not think the book was a genuine Gospel.

 

In 1907, Lonsdale and Laura Ragg published an English translation of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas.’ They also said they thought the ‘Gospel’ was fake. Their translation was first published in the Muslim world in 1973. It is estimated that since then, about 100 000 copies have been printed in Pakistan alone. Translations into Arabic and other languages were also published. These materials caused excitement among Muslims. They thought they had at last found a document - of Christian origin -  which proved that Jesus was the Isa Al-Massih of Islam and that Muhammad was the predicted messenger of Allah.

 

II. Evidence against the authenticity of the ‘Barnabas gospel’

 

Most Muslims believe that this ‘Gospel’ is rejected by Christians only because of its Islamic character. However, there are many internal and external factors which provide far better grounds for rejecting it.

 

1. Barnabas could never have been its author.

 

Muslims say that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ is an original Gospel, written in the first century A.D. by a Jewish man who travelled with Jesus.

 

The book claims to have been written by one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. The Biblical Barnabas, however, only appeared on the scene after Jesus’ death and resurrection. We read in the Bible:

 

And Joses, who was also named Barnabas by the apostle (which means, Son of encouragement), a Levite of the country of Cyprus, having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at the apostles’ feet (Injil, Acts 4:36-37).

 

This man Joses was given the name Barnabas by the apostles. He was certainly not one of the original twelve disciples, whose names are mentioned in two of the Gospels (Mathew 10:2-4 and Luke 6:14-16). Barnabas is not in either list, nor does his name appear anywhere in all four Gospels. This fact is plainly contradicted in the ‘Gospel of Barnabas.’ It says that Jesus called Barnabas by name on several occasions, for example, “Jesus answered: ‘Be not sore grieved, Barnabas, for those whom God chose before the creation of the world shall not perish’” (Gospel of Barnabas, para.19).

 

Jesus could not have said these words to Barnabas, since Barnabas received his name sometime after Jesus went up to heaven! Here is further evidence that this book was not written by Barnabas:

 

2. Its Linguistic, Historical and Geographical Errors

 

If Barnabas really was the author, he would have been familiar with the basic facts of Jewish life at this time. Let us see if the author was.

 

a/ Christ. The word (Christ) is the Greek translation for the Hebrew word  (Messiah). When translated into English both these words mean the Anointed One or the Chosen One. This word is not rare. It is one of the most common words in Jewish and Christian vocabulary. There is no doubt that a religious Jew like the Biblical Barnabas would have been familiar with it.

At the very start of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ Jesus is called the Christ: “God has during these past days visited us by his prophet Jesus Christ” (para.2). Throughout the book, however, Jesus denies being the Messiah: “Jesus confessed and said the truth, ‘I am not the Messiah’” (para.42). How could Jesus be the Christ and yet deny being the Messiah, when both words mean exactly the same thing? Whoever wrote this book did not know that the Greek meaning of the word Christ is Messiah. The real Barnabas was Hebrew, he knew Greek, and could not have made this mistake.

b/ The Rulers of the First Century A.D. In paragraph 3 of the book we are told that Herod and Pilate both ruled in Judea at the time of Jesus' birth: “There reigned at that time in Judea Herod, by decree of Caesar Augustus, and Pilate was governor.” This is historically wrong. Pilate was not  governor when Jesus was born. The governor at that time was King Herod the great who ruled alone from 37-4 B.C.[1] Pilate ruled thirty years later from A.D. 26-36. King Herod the great and Pilate never ruled in Judea at the same time. This has been affirmed historically.

 

The real Barnabas lived during the rule of Pilate, so if he was the writer of this book, how could he make such a simple mistake?

c/ Geography. In paragraphs 20-21 we are told about Jesus sailing to Nazareth and being welcomed by the seamen of that town. He then leaves Nazareth and goes up to Capernaum:

Jesus went to the sea of Galilee, and having embarked in a ship sailed to his city of Nazareth. ... Having arrived at the city of Nazareth the seamen spread through the city all that Jesus wrought (did)...(then) Jesus went up to Capernaum (paras.20-21).

Jesus often visited Nazareth and Capernaum with his disciples, so his disciples must have known these towns well. The author of this book, however, did not! Nazareth was not a fishing village. In fact it was about 14 km from the sea of Galilee, situated in the foothills of a mountain range! Capernaum was the fishing village Jesus arrived at with his disciples, not Nazareth. The author could not have been a disciple of Jesus. This mistake also makes us doubt that he had ever lived in that region.

What can we conclude from this? The ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ makes basic mistakes about the language, history and geography of the Jewish world in the first century A.D. These mistakes suggest that it was not written by Barnabas in the first century.

3. Its Medieval Date

 

There are many proofs that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ is a fifteenth century forgery. As mentioned above, the introductory notes of the Ragg’s translation stated that it was a medieval fabrication. They believed it to be the work of an apostate from Christianity, dating from sometime between the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries.

 

Mr. Khalil Saada, who translated the Barnabas ‘Gospel’ into Arabic in 1908, wrote in his introduction: ‘All the historians agree that Barnabas' Bible was written in the intermediary ages.’ Surprisingly, these introductory notes were omitted from later publications.

 

It is not difficult to prove that this ‘Gospel’ was first compiled centuries after the times of both Jesus and Muhammad. Consider the following facts:

a/ The Manuscript Evidence. The oldest copies are written in Italian and Spanish. These date from the fifteenth century or later.

b/ The Jubilee Year. In the time of Moses God told the Jews to observe a Jubilee year every fifty years:

 

And you shall consecrate the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land to all its inhabitants. It shall be a Jubilee for you; and each of you shall return to his possession, and each of you shall return to his family. That fiftieth year shall be a Jubilee to you; in it you shall neither  sow nor reap what grows of its own accord, nor gather the grapes of your untended vine.

(Leviticus 25:10-11).

In the year 1300 Pope Boniface VIII wrongly declared that the Jubilee should be celebrated every hundred years. After his death, the next Pope, Clement VI, changed it back to every fifty years. Therefore, in Church history there was a specific period of time when the Jubilee was thought by many to be every hundred years. In the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ these words are put on Jesus' lips: “Insomuch that the year of Jubilee, which now comes every 100 years, shall by the Messiah be reduced to every year in every place” (para.82).

The author of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ unwittingly accepted the Pope's false decree and included it in his book! He must have lived during or after the time of Pope Boniface VIII.

Is there further evidence to suggest that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ dates from the fourteenth or fifteenth century? Yes there is.

c/ Quotations from Dante. Dante was a famous and popular poet of the fourteenth century who lived at about the same time as Pope Boniface. Among Dante's works is a book of poetry called, The Divine Comedy. In this book he describes ascending through nine heavens to reach paradise, the tenth. Many passages in the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ show a dependence on Dante’s work. For example, like Dante, the author speaks of nine heavens and says that paradise is greater than all of them put together:

Paradise is so great that no man can measure it. Verily I say unto thee that the heavens are nine, among which are set the planets, that are distant one from another five hundred years journey for a man ... and Verily I say unto thee that paradise is greater than all the earth and heavens together. (para.178).

It appears that the author of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ took the idea of nine heavens from reading Dante.

d/ Wine barrels. The ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ speaks of storing wine in wooden wine-casks (para.152). This was a common practice in medieval Europe but not in first-century Palestine where wine was stored in skins (Matthew 9:17). Once again, this shows that the author was more at home in medieval Europe than in the land of Palestine.

4. How the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ Contradicts the Teachings of Islam

 

Though the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ supports the teachings of Islam in many ways, there are a few rare occasions when it does not.

 

a/  The Messiah - Jesus or Muhammad? In John 1.20 (Injil), John the Baptist denies that he is the Messiah. The ‘Gospel of Barnabas,’ however, makes Jesus deny the same thing in much the same words:

 

Jesus confessed and said the truth, “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” (Paras.42, 82). Then said the priest: “How shall the Messiah be called?” ...(Jesus answered) « Muhammad is his blessed name » (para.97).

 

Here the author of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ trips himself up, since the Qur'an (like the Bible) teaches that Jesus alone is the Messiah, and it never teaches that Muhammad is the Messiah: “O Mary! Allah giveth thee glad tidings of a word from him, His name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary” (Surah 3:45, Yusuf Ali translation).

b/ The Birth of Jesus. The Qur'an says that Mary had pain when she gave birth to Jesus: “So she conceived him, and she retired with him to a remote place. And the pains of childbirth drove her to the trunk of a palm tree” (Surah 19:22-23, Yusuf Ali).

However, the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ teaches the opposite: “The virgin was surrounded by a light exceeding bright, and brought forth her son without pain” (para.3). This statement contradicts both the Bible and the Qur’an. It also proves the ‘Gospel’s’ fifteenth century origin, since it parallels Catholic beliefs of the Middle Ages.

c/ The Heavens. The Qur'an says that there are seven heavens: ‘The seven heavens and the earth, and all beings therein, declare His glory’ (Surah 17:44, Yusuf Ali). The ‘Gospel of Barnabas,’ however, teaches that there are nine: “Verily I say unto thee that the heavens are nine, among which are set the planets, that are distant one from another five hundred years journey for a man” (para.178).

d/ The Last Days. While the Qur’an states that men will be alive until the Day of Judgment, when the trumpet shall sound (Surah 80:37), the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ says that on the thirteen day of the final period before the end, all mankind will die and every living thing in earth shall perish (para.53).

 

e/ Death of Angels. The author of the Barnabas ‘Gospel’ wrote that during the last days before the Great Judgment “the holy angels shall die, and God alone shall remain alive” (para.53). The Qur’an, however, never speaks of the death of angels. In fact it states that, on the Day of Judgment, eight angels shall bear the throne of Allah (Surah 69.17).

f/ Wives. Marriage in the Qur'an binds a woman to one man, but it does not bind a man to one woman. Muslim men are free to have several wives (Surah 4:3) and an unlimited number of female servants (Surah 70:30). The ‘Gospel of Barnabas,’ however, teaches the Biblical idea of marriage; that marriage binds a man and a woman equally together: “Let a man content himself therefore with the wife whom his creator has given him, and let him forget every other woman” (para.115).

5. Its Self-Contradiction

There are plenty of contradictions between the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ and the Bible, and between the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ and the Qur'an. But it also contradicts itself. I have already mentioned the example of Jesus described as the Christ and then rejected as the Messiah. Here is another contradiction:

Jesus predicts his death. In paragraph 193 the book gives its version of Jesus raising his friend Lazarus from the dead. Near the middle of the paragraph we read:

Jesus having come to the sepulchre, where every one was weeping, said: “Weep not, for Lazarus sleeps, and I am come to awake him.” The Pharisees said among themselves: “Would to God that you did so sleep!” Then Jesus said: “Mine hour is not yet come; but when it shall come I shall sleep in like manner, and shall be speedily awakened.” Then Jesus said again: ‘Take away the stone from the sepulchre.’

In other words, Jesus says that, just like Lazarus, ‘he will die and after a few days be raised again from the dead.’ How can Jesus predict this of himself when later in the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ (paras.216 & 217) it is Judas who is arrested and crucified in his place?

6. Its absence in the writings of the early Church teachers

Between the first and fourteenth centuries, no Christian teachers ever quoted from the ‘Gospel of Barnabas.’ If it had been considered authentic, surely it would have been cited many times during this long period. All the other books of Scripture are quoted from many times. Had this ‘Gospel’ even been in existence, authentic or not, surely it would have been quoted by someone. But no one even mentioned it throughout 1,500 years of its supposed existence!

 

7. Its absence in early Islamic writings.

 

The ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ is widely used by Muslim apologists today, yet no Muslim writers referred to it before the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries. Surely they would have done so if it had existed. Many Muslim writers such as Ibn Hasm (d. 456 A.H.), Ibn Taimiyyah (d. 728 A.H.), and Hajji Khalifah (d. 1067 A.H.) would no doubt have used the ‘Gospel of Barnabas.’ But not a single person referred to it when Muslims and Christians were in heated debate between the seventh and fifteenth centuries.

8. Its rejection by the latest Muslim scholars

There is little room for Muslims to continue believing that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ is an original Gospel which is consistent with the Qur’an and Islamic tradition. Not surprisingly, many Muslim scholars have rejected the book as a forgery in recent years. They have realized that to claim divine origin for such a book is an embarrassment to the cause of Islam.

 

The Arabic encyclopedia known as the simplified Arabic encyclopedia [which was supervised by famous Muslim scholars and was published in Cairo in 1965 by Dar Al-kalam (the pen house)] states on page 354:

Barnabas' Bible is a spurious book written by an European in the fifteenth century, And in its description of the political and religious circumstances in Jerusalem during the time of the Christ were grave mistakes. It stated that Iesa proclaimed that he was not the Christ, but he came telling the glad tiding of the coming of Muhammad who will be the Christ.

No one can believe the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ and the Qur’an at the same time. He who accepts this ‘Gospel’ can be neither a true Muslim, nor a true Christian. No wonder the late distinguished professor of Islam, Dr. Abbas Mahmoud Al Aqqad, former professor at the Islamic university, Al Azhar Al Sharif, advised Muslims to stay away from this false ‘Gospel.’ According to the professor, and the facts of the case, the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ destroys Islam as much, if not more, than it destroys Christianity (read for example his article in Al-Akhbar (the news) newspaper on 26^th Oct 1959).

 

III. So who wrote the ‘Barnabas Gospel’?

 

The great question we must ask about this book is, ‘Who wrote it?’ We have seen that the author was not familiar with the language, history or geography of the time of Jesus. The book includes several fourteenth century ideas, and the manuscript evidence dates from the fifteenth century onwards. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ was written in the fourteenth century A.D. and not in the first century by a disciple of Jesus. Who then could have written it?

It was probably written by an apostate from Christianity. One scholar suggests that the author was a Spanish Muslim, forcibly converted to Christianity during the time of the Spanish Inquisition, who took private revenge by creating an Islamic ‘Gospel.’ Another scholar sees the Roman Catholic monk Fra Marino himself as the author. After converting to Islam (an act of revenge after losing the favour of Pope Sixtus V), he composed the manuscript and invented the story of its ‘discovery’.

 

We cannot know for sure who wrote this book. What we do know is that it could not have been written by Barnabas of the first century.

 

Conclusion

Above are just a few facts among many which prove how ridiculous the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’ really is. Anyone who is aware of its contents, yet continues to use it as a genuine Gospel account of Jesus at the expense of the Bible, must share in the guilt of the author.

 

This work, far from being an authentic first-century account of the facts about Jesus, is actually a late medieval fabrication. The only genuine first-century records we have of the life of Christ are found in the New Testament. The four Biblical Gospels contradict the teaching of the ‘Gospel of Barnabas’.