A Propaganda Campaign: 1500 Years Old Bible Claims Jesus Was Not Crucified Found in Turkey

Posted: May 6, 2014 in The Bible, Uncategorized

This article was composed by: Benjamin Nehemiah, author of Quantum PropheciesBabylon Resurrected 

You may have come across an intriguing, yet now discredited, story which has been circulating online (and the in the media) over the past couple years. According to Higher Perspective: “Discovered and kept secret in the year 2000, the book contains the Gospel of Barnabas – a disciple of Christ – which shows that Jesus was not crucified, nor was he the son of God, but a Prophet.  The book also calls Apostle Paul ‘The Impostor’.  The book also claims that Jesus ascended to heaven alive, and that Judas Iscariot was crucified in his place.” It also predicts the coming of Muhammad, the founder of Islam. As has been reported in the Muslim media, and also the Western media, the book was reportedly seized from a gang of smugglers (who were smuggling antiques) in a Mediterranean-area operation. According to the reports, “experts” and “religious authorities” in Tehram insist the book is an original. The discovery contains the Gospel of Barnabas which confirms the Islamic view of Jesus and contradicts the orthodox Christian view. However, several characteristics of this artefact damage the credibility of this sensational story.

bibleturkey1

Firstly, where is this 1,500 year old Bible – have any experts been able to investigate this properly? The answer is no. Even Wikipedia admits that scholars almost unanimously agree that the  Gospel of Barnabas was written in the 16th century as a “pseudo-Gospel”, and perhaps contains remnants of earlier apocryphal work (maybe Gnostic or Ebionite – remember that various Gnostic/Ebionite teachings/writings which emerged from the 2nd century contradict the four canonical Gospel accounts of Jesus). 

It is claimed that this book was written in Aramaic (the language Jesus spoke). However, any modern Assyrian (neo-Aramaic) speaker can read the gold inscription:

  • Transliteration: b-shimmit maran paish kteewa aha ktawa al idateh d-rabbaneh d-dera illaya b-ninweh b’sheeta d-alpa w-khamshamma d-maran
  • Translation: In the name of our Lord, this book is written on the hands of the monks of the high monastery in Nineveh, in the 1,500th year of our Lord.

This mysterious Bible states “in the 1,500th year”  not that it is “1,500 years old” (what an embarrassing oversight). However, modern Assyrian was standardized in the 1840s and the first Modern Assyrian Bible was produced in 1848. This artefact is highly unlikely to be from the 16th century and more likely can be dated to the 19th century. Rather than an open and objective study of this artefact, it is being used by the misinformed, the liberal media, the Muslims and the conspiracy theorist as some kind of discovery which undermines Christianity. Even if this was a genuine 1,500 year old Bible, it wouldn’t be much of a revelation. Various writings and teachings (such as Gnosticism) emerged in the early 2nd century (after Christ’s death) which don’t conform to the orthodox Gospel accounts.

A Propaganda Campaign?

Furthermore, seeing as this discovery confirms the Islamic understanding of  Christ, it appears that this might be Islamic propaganda. As somebody who has a keen interest in history, specifically Islam, I find this frustrating. When I first began to study Islam, I was informed by numerous Muslim sources that the original Quran is still in existence. After I began to search for the original Quran, I discovered there isn’t one and the claim is simply untrue. There are no Quranic manuscripts prior to 750 AD (100 years after the death of Muhammad). Whilst many may claim that the “uthmaic recensions” are still in existence, this is untrue. The Sammarkand Manuscript (located in Tashkent library, Uzbekistan) and and the Topkapi Manuscript (Istanbul, Turkey) are indeed old but following ample etymological analysis: “… these two manuscripts are written in the Kufic Script, a script which according to modern Quranic manuscript experts, such as Martin Lings and Yasin Hamid Safadi, did not appear until late into the eighth century, and was not in use at all in Mecca and Medina in the seventh century.” Thus, they were compiled in the late 8th century or early 9th century and this presents some challenges to the Islamic tradition. What is more frustrating is that the primary sources of information regarding Muhammad and the birth of Islam date from 150-300 years after his death (which means they are not primary sources or “witness accounts” but instead, they are secondary sources compiled from earlier writings which are no longer in existence). Again, this presents problems for Islamic tradition – or at least, I find it problematic.

In comparison with the Bible, there are over 200 manuscripts in existence which pre-date the year 600 AD. There are also 32,000 quotations from the New Testament found in writings from before the council of Nicea in 325 A.D. Furthermore, the totality of Biblical manuscripts, manuscript fragments and early church writings number in the tens of thousands (and some are over 2,000 years old). There truly is an abundance of data which can be corroborated, if one wishes to evaluate the integrity of the modern Bible.

Source: http://www.aina.org/news/2012022916569.htm

Source: http://69422.weblog.leidenuniv.nl/2012/03/07/a-1500-year-old-aramaic-bible-in-ankara/

Source: http://www.debate.org.uk/debate-topics/historical/the-bible-and-the-quran/the-qurans-manuscript-evidence/

Advertisements
Comments
  1. never mind says:

    Why islamic propaganda and not Jewish? The arabs are dangerous,but jews even more…after al,islam recognises Jesus at least,as a prophet,while theIsrael (Jews) killed the Messiah 2000 years ago and still trying to extirpate His Holly Name….

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s