Gospel of Barnabas - Truth, Lies and Historicity

7/29/2019 Gospel of Barnabas - Truth, Lies and Historicity

1/316

Survey and Commentary: ranslation By :By Dr. Omar Zaid

he Gospel Of Barnabas :

ruth, Lies and Historicity

Lonsdale and Laura Ragg


2/316

In the Name o Allah, Most Benecient, Most Merciul


3/316

3

Contents

BOOK - T F S, G B S C. 9

Introduction 11Te Schism, Part I 13Te Schism, Part II 20Te Gospel o Barnabas: Historicity and Criticism 28In Closing: Commentary on Te Kingdom o God 33Te Jesuit Menace: 41Bibliography ; In Addition to those cited in ootnotes or endnotes 45Appendix I - On the Myth o Apostolic Succession 48Appendix II - Te ribe o Dan oday 50

Appendix III - 52Catalogue o the 60 Canonical Books 56Appendix IV. - Origin o the Nazarenes and Ebionites 57Appendix V - Te GoB Manuscripts 59Appendix VII - Te Mark O Cain 64Appendix VIII - Te Jesuit Oath 67Index 69


4/316

4

Contents (cont.)

BOOK 2 - he Gospel according to Barnabas . 88

Te Opening 89Chapter 1 - Glad idings From An Unlikely Source 90Chapter 2 - Warning and Suspicions 91Chapter 3 - Te Virgin Birth 92Chapter 4 : Te Messiah, Jesus, Son o Mary is born 93Chapter 5 - Circumcision 94Chapter 6 - Tree Wise Men 95Chapter 7 - Te Magi Warned 96Chapter 8 - Herod Hunting For Children 97Chapter 9 - Jesus at 12 98

Chapter 10 - Te Gospel to Jesus at 30 99Chapter 11 - A Leper Cured 100Chapter 12 - Te First Sermon 101Chapter 13 - Gabriel Comorts Jesus 102Chapter 14 - Te welve Apostles 103Chapter 15 - Water Into Wine 104Chapter 16 - Te Sermon on the Mount 105Chapter 17 - rue Believers 106Chapter 18 - Persecution and Salvation 107Chapter 19 - Betrayal Foretold & Lepers Healed 108Chapter 20 - Walk on Water 109

Chapter 21 - Swine Cast into the Sea 110Chapter 22 - Uncircumcised As Dogs 111Chapter 23 - Origin o Circumcision, and Gods Covenant 112Chapter 25 - Poverty and Riches 114Chapter 26 - Loving God 115Chapter 27 - Abrahams Prudence 117Chapter 28 - Abraham Escapes the Fire 118Chapter 29 - Ten Spake God 119Chapter 30 - Eternal Lie 120Chapter 31 - o Caesar Tat is Caesars 121

Chapter 32 - Statues o Flesh 122Chapter 33 - Te Greatest Sin 123Chapter 34 - Humility 124Chapter 35 - Satan Rebels 125Chapter 36 - Te Signicance o rue Prayer 126Chapter 37 - A Prayer 127Chapter 38 - Ritual Ablution 128Chapter 39 - Te Creation o Adam 129Chapter 40 - Te First Sin 130Chapter 41 - Out o Paradise 131

Chapter 42 - Who is the Messiah 132


5/316

5


Chapter 43 - Te Promise to Ishmael 133Chapter 45 - Te Hypocrites 135Chapter 46 - Laborers in the Vineyard 136Chapter 47 - Te Widows son o Nain 137Chapter 48 - umult at Nain 138Chapter 49 - Preaching at Capernaum 139Chapter 50 - Divine Judgement 140Chapter 51 - Satans Salvation? 141Chapter 52 - Te Dreadul Day 142Chapter 53 - Te Last Age 143Chapter 54 - Sounding o the Horn 144Chapter 55 - Muhammads Intercession 145Chapter 56 - Te Book 146

Chapter 57 - Judgement o the Reprobates 147Chapter 58 - Woe to the Evil-doers 148Chapter 59 - Hell 149Chapter 60 - Te Horrors o the Hell-re 150Chapter 61 - A Parable... 151Chapter 62 - Te Merchant 152Chapter 63 - Good and Evil 153Chapter 64 - Against Vengeance 154Chapter 65 - Te Probatica 155Chapter 66 - God Alone is Good 156

Chapter 67 - Corrupted Sacrice 157Chapter 68 - Reward or Punishment 158Chapter 69 - Priests Who Preer Tis World 159Chapter 70 - Rebuking Peter 160Chapter 71 - Healings in Galilee 161Chapter 72 - Betrayal and Heartache 162Chapter 73 - Four Ways o Satan 163Chapter 74 - Sin in Tought 164Chapter 75 - A Recipe For Clean Toughts 165Chapter 76 - Tree Kinds o Husbandmen 166Chapter 77 - Knowledge In Practice 167Chapter 78 - Value o Learning 168Chapter 79 - Law Not For Love o Law 169Chapter 80 - Learn to Work Well 170Chapter 81 - A Woman o Samaria 171Chapter 82 - Woman- a ruth Seeker 172Chapter 83 - Te Other Food 173Chapter 84 - Purity in Prayer 174Chapter 85 - rue Companions 175Chapter 86 - Qualities o Companions 176Chapter 87 - Kingdom o heaven 177

Chapter 88 - Forgiveness 178


6/316

6


Chapter 89 - Repentance 179Chapter 90 - O Faith 180Chapter 91 - Disturbance Regarding Jesus 181Chapter 92 - Hailed as God near Jordan 182Chapter 93 I am but a man 183Chapter 94 - Prophetic Miracles 184Chapter 95 - Attributes o God 185Chapter 96 - A Mercy to the Worlds 186Chapter 97 - His Blessed Name Is Muhammad 187Chapter 98 - Decree o Roman Senate 188Chapter 99 - God is Jealous or His Honor 189Chapter 105 - God and the Universe 195

Chapter 106 - Te Body, the Soul and the Senses 196Chapter 107 - Fast o Penitence 197Chapter 108 - Sleep o Body and Soul 198Chapter 109 - Never orget God 199Chapter 110 - Desire or good 200Chapter 111 - Weep, Fast and Watch 201Chapter 112 - A Secret Revealed to Barnabas 202Chapter 113 - Parable o a barren g tree 203Chapter 114 - Man is born to work 204Chapter 115 - Lust 205

Chapter 116 - Te Lust o Eye may blind you 206Chapter 117 - Elijah and the Blind Man 207Chapter 118 - Guard the Eye 208Chapter 119 - Prayer is the Medicine o the Soul 209Chapter 120 - Vain talk weakens Intellect 210Chapter 121 - alk only as necessary 211Chapter 122 - Evils o Avarice 212Chapter 123 Te Composition o Man 213Chapter 124 - Te Faith is One 214Chapter 125 - Give or love o God 215Chapter 126 - Disciples preach throughout Judaea 216Chapter 127 - Jesus Preaches at Jerusalem 217Chapter 128 - Prayers o a pharisee and a publican 218Chapter 129 - Jesus at Simons house 219Chapter 130 Simon and a public sinner 220Chapter 131 - John at Herods table 221Chapter 132 - Sower and the tares 222Chapter 133 Unbelieving Parents and Faithul sons 223Chapter 134 - Regarding preachers 224Chapter 135 - Te Seven Centers o Hell 225Chapter 136 - Te Sight o Hell 227

Chapter 137 - Faithul without Deeds 228


7/316

7


Chapter 138 - Miracle o the Harvest 229Chapter 139 - Betrayal Foretold 230Chapter 140 Measure Lie by Death 231Chapter 141 - Remembrance o Death 232Chapter 142 - Judas Coners with Priests 233Chapter 143 - Disciples arrive at Damascus 234Chapter 144 - O Te Origin o Pharisees 235Chapter 145 - Te Little Book o Elijah 236Chapter 146 - Te Prodigal Son 238Chapter 147 - Te Prodigal Son ... 239Chapter 148 - Te wo Hermit-Pharisees 240Chapter 149 - Te wo Hermit-Pharisees... 241

Chapter 150 - Te wo Hermit-Pharisees... 242Chapter 151 - Te Marks o a rue Pharisee 243Chapter 152 - Roman Soldiers 244Chapter 153 - Miracle Wrought on Soldiers 245Chapter 154 - Jesus and a Doctor 246Chapter 155 - On the Forbidden Fruit 247Chapter 156 A Man Born Blind Receives his sight 248Chapter 157 Te man born blind marvelled at their unbelie 249Chapter 158 - Te World o Tree Kinds 250Chapter 159 - Te Nature o Sin 251

Chapter 160 - Ahab and Micaiah 252Chapter 161 - O Nature o Sin 253Chapter 162 - Predestination 254Chapter 163 - Muhammad- the White Cloud o Mercy 255Chapter 164 - No Predestination unto Reprobation 256Chapter 165 - Te Elect 257Chapter 166 - Predestination and Freedom 258Chapter 167 - Predestination Inscrutable 259Chapter 168 - Te Clear Mirror 260Chapter 169 - Te Glory o Paradise 261Chapter 170 - Wages Forever 262Chapter 171 - Abundance o Rewards in Paradise 263Chapter 172 - Grain o Sand to the Sea 264Chapter 173 - Abundance in Paradise 265Chapter 174 - Body without Putreaction 266Chapter 175 - God says this in Isaiah the prophet 267Chapter 176 - No Envy in Paradise 268Chapter 177 - Sun and Moon o Paradise 269Chapter 178 - Flawed Logic o Peter 270Chapter 179 - God thru Eye o Paradise 271Chapter 180 - Mans Merit 272


8/316

8


Chapter 181 - Shun: I Merit 273Chapter 182 - Call me Brother not Lord 274Chapter 183 - rue Humility 275Chapter 184 - Le with False Pharisees 276Chapter 185 - Haggai and Obadiah 277Chapter 186 - Haggais Prayer 278Chapter 187 - Haggai and Hosea 279Chapter 188 - Hosea in Jerusalem 280Chapter 189 - Te Sun Stood Still or 12 Hours 281Chapter 190 - Do not Oend God at all costs 282Chapter 191 - Book o Moses on the Messiah 283Chapter 192 - God has not locked up his mercy in Israel alone 284

Chapter 193 - Jesus at the tomb o Lazarus 285Chapter 194 - Lie is Death i no Perception o God 286Chapter 195 - Jesus in the house o Lazarus 287Chapter 196 - Lazarus has died once only 288Chapter 197 - Te Similitude o a good Axe 289Chapter 198 - On death and its teaching 290Chapter 199 - Worth o a single tear in repentence 291Chapter 200 - Jesus Entereth Jerusalem 292Chapter 201 - Te Woman taken in adultery 293Chapter 202 - Great is the number o the righteous unrighteous 294

Chapter 203 - Gods Judgement on Jerusalem 295Chapter 204 - Judgement on Jerusalem (cont) 296Chapter 205 - In the House o Simon the Leper 297Chapter 206 - Jesus Conronts the high Priest 298Chapter 207 - Jesus Conronts the high Priest (cont.) 299Chapter 208 - Priests ry Stoning Jesus 300Chapter 209 - Gabriel Comorts Mary 301Chapter 210 - Te Search or Jesus 302Chapter 211- Jesus Consoles his Disciples 303Chapter 212 - Jesus Prays 304Chapter 213 - Jesus Washes Disciples Feet 305Chapter 214 - Betrayal 306Chapter 215 - Divine Intervention 307Chapter 216 - ransormation 308Chapter 217 - Crucixion 309Chapter 218 - Body o Judas Stolen 312Chapter 219 - Jesus Reappearance 313Chapter 220 - Jesus and the Four Angels 314Chapter 221 - Jesus Final Message to Barnabas 315Chapter 222 - Jesus Ascension 316


9/316

BOOK 1 - he Forgotten Saints,Gospel of Barnabas Survey and

Commentary.

By Dr. Omar Zaid, M.D.Research Fellow, ISAC,

IIUM, KL, Malaysia.


10/316

F S()

T G BSurvey and Commentary

O Z, M.D.

Research Fellow,ISAC, IIUM,KL, Malaysia.

Jan. 2008

Revision April, 2010

All Rights Reserved


11/316

Introduction

Little is known o Barnabas, the one time companion o Paul. It is said they journeyed as mis-sionaries to the island o Cyprus. In those days people believed their gods would visit them atwill, and there, in Lystra, the two men are reported to have perormed such astonishing mira-cles that the appreciative Lystrans prepared to sacrice a bull in their honor as touring deities.Barnabas was the elder and I suspect his demeanor prompted the Lystrans to mistake him or

their chie god, Saturn, while they named the less imposing gure o Paul,1 Mercury, known asthe messenger o his rather austere and imposing sire.

On pondering this New estament (N) anecdote, I queried why Paul is said to be responsibleor two-thirds o the N while Barnabas is barely known and none o his literature has reachedus... or has it? Te answer is not readily made with certainty as is so much o what is containedin the N since Constantines imposition o the spurious text.2 One thing is assured however:no sincere monotheist with knowledge o the prophetic monotheist history will be able to read

the Gospel ascribed to Barnabas without a similar assessment as was made by the people o

Lystra. Te works credited to Paul pale when compared to the singular gravity o the GoBs corecontent. Moreover, the man presented by both writers as Jesus (Prophet Isa) is hardly recog-

nizable as the same person. Te truth o the matter remains in the realm o reasonably cogentspeculation, and otherwise with Allah swt.

What this (rst) book attempts is to :

1. Review the historicity o the Gospel o Barnabas (GoB);2. Discuss the core content o this work in light o the schism between James and Paul;

3. Lay groundwork or urther discourse;

4. Attempt to place the entire matter in perspective with a view to err on the side o caution bothor scholars and laymen who may enthusiastically misuse the work or errant polemics and / orDakwah.

5. Provide commentary relevant to current events in light o the schism and polemics in whichBarnabas and later this Gospel played / play a pivotal role.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Paul is described as a bit gnome-like in habitus hardly a model or the athletic mold o Mercury: ... a mano small stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a good state o body, with eyebrows meeting and the nose

somewhat hooked, ull o riendliness ... rom: A description by Onesiphorus, Giuseppe Riciotti: Paul the Apostle,

Milwaukee, Bruce, 1953, pp 153-159

2 Constantine was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and he ultimately decided upon a new god or them. o involveBritish actions [his antecedents], he ruled that the name o the mighty Druid god, Hesus (crucied in Britain andlater restored to lie), be joined with the Eastern savior-god, Krishna (Krishna is Sanskrit or Christ), and thus a

caricature, or the personication o an ideal, Hesus Krishna, would be the name o the new Roman god. A vote wastaken and it was with a majority show o hands that both divinities became one God . . . 161 votes to 157. Follow-ing longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the ocial gathering and the Roman Apotheoses Decree to

legally deiy two deities as one, and did so by democratic consent. A new god was proclaimed and ocially ratiedby Constantine (Acta Concilii Niceni, Colon, 1618)... [Krishnianity] ... and when the letterJ was introduced

into alphabets around the Ninth Century, the linguistic relic o the name became Jesus Christ. [NB: the letter Jwas not introduced to English until the 16th Century.] Te Papal Billions, ony Bushby, (Queensland, Australia,

Joshua Books, 2008) pp. 23-25. ISBN 978-0-9804101-1-2

11


12/316

I owe a word o gratitude to Pro. Emeritus Osman Bakar or suggesting and then guiding thissurvey aer he named it Forgotten Saint. I added the s or reasons made clear below. I alsothank those who preceded us in taking serious interest in this work. May Allah reward them

and guide us in our review o a chapter and work rom the theological chronicles that remainsin the many shadows o suspicion and ambiguity.

Omar Zaid, M.D.

12


13/316

he Schism, Part I

Te Apostle Barnabas is an important character in early Christian sources but what ew inde-pendent historical sources we have rom that period make no mention o him, nor o anyone

like him... Given this small amount o inormation, and the act that he does not appear outsideo Christian sources, it must be admitted that we cannot say or certain that he was even a real,historical gure... Christian and even secular writers regularly assume that Lukes Acts o the

Apostles is a reliable historical source. More objective appraisals o Acts, however, dismiss it asa pseudo-historical Hellenistic romance rom the second century CE and maintain that it can-

not be trusted at all...

Te rst part o Acts is highly mythologized; only the second hal seems to have some ker-nel o actual historical reportage. As it happens, notices concerning Barnabas-appear entirelywithin the rst part o Acts. In act, the point at which the mythologized section ends and the

We document begin coincides more or less with the point at which Barnabas drops out o thenarrative. In the Pauline epistles, on the other hand, Barnabas-Appears in the letters that eventhe most skeptical critics tend to nominate as authentic, the Letter to the Galatians especially.

Outside o Acts and Pauls letters most orthodox notices o Barnabas reer to an Epistle writtenin his name. Some early Fathers o the Church supported moves to include this epistle in the

canon.

Ultimately, it was rejected but it still had a place o honor among early Christian writings. Wecan be condent, however, that the Barnabean epistle is pseudepigraphica: it was not writ-

ten by the historical Barnabas despite claims that are sometimes made or it. It is, or a start, a

deeply anti-Semitic work and, as a rule o thumb, Jews even Christian Jews do not writeanti-Semitic works. Muslim enthusiasts or the medieval Gospel o Barnabas have oen con-used this Epistle and reerences to this Epistle in early Church literature or a Gospel under

Barnabas name. In act, there is no mention o a Gospel according to Barnabas until the sixthcentury. Another work, the Acts o Barnabas, is clearly late and adds little that is useul to our

understanding o this character. It records that he went to Cyprus where he was martyred at thehands o Jebusites said to be kinsmen o Nero who had recognized him as a companion o

Paul. Te Acts o Barnabas is the main source rom which Barnabas is nominated as the patronsaint o Cyprus.

13


14/316

Tis extract o Pro. Blackhirsts summations can hardly be improved on. Clement o Alexan-dria (c.150 - 211/216) and Eusubeus (c. 263-339), 4 both claim that Barnabas was one o the

seventy disciples mentioned in Lukes Gospel; men whom Jesus sent throughout the Holy Landto proclaim the nearness o the Kingdom o God.1 Te Kingdom o God is the central theme

o the N as expounded in ootnote (i). Furthermore, the citations just noted may be signi-

cant, or i this Barnabas is the author o the core content or central theme o the GoB, Clem-ent and Eusubius place him in a position o closer proximity to Prophet Isa than Occidental

commentators would like to acknowledge. Te supposed author o the work we now considerclaims to have ollowed Jesus or the better part o his ministry and or the purpose o record-ing the Masters words and deeds. I this is so, then hes a likely candidate or author o the lostbook known as the Sayings o Isa or injiil.2 As it is presently, commentators and church histo-rians generally have Barnabas the Apostle joining the group o Apostles sometime aer the

crucixion i.e., post-Pentecost to be exact. Tereore, I will use Barnabas-G when discussingthe Apostle whose historicity is primarily established on the basis o the suspect N, and whenreerring to the disputed Gospels author, I will use Barnabas. I also ask the reader to careully

review the ootnote on Te Kingdom o God beore proceeding, as it is the vital theme o thisdiscussion......

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

3 Dr R. Blackhirst, Barnabas and the Gospels: Was there an Early Gospel o Barnabas?Te Journal o Higher Criticism, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2000. Pro. Blackhirst has over een years experience as a tutor,

lecturer and supervisor across the Arts and Humanities disciplines. Te ocus o his teaching is in Philosophy andReligious Studies. He currently teaches at La robe University, Australia, where he oers the ollowing package ounits and modules o study: Introducing Religious Studies (Sacred exts), Islam and the West, Renaissance Art,raditional Cosmologies, Medieval Studies, Te Biblical World, Lost exts & Apocrypha - Doctoral Dissertation

entitled Myth in the imaeus: the Mythological Underpinnings o Platos Cosmology. Te thesis explores theroots o Platos cosmology and natural science in Greek mythology and in the religious cults o ancient Athens.

4 Clement o Alexandria (Strom., II, 20, P.G., VIII, col. 1060) , Eusebius (H. E., II, i, P.G., XX, col. 117 Ecclesiasti-cal History, Book. VII. II. 1.)

14


15/316

Barnabas-G is said to have come rom a Levite amily o landed gentry rom the Isle o Cyprus.Both he and Paul may have been disciples o the highly regarded Gemaliel, a revered Jewish

theologian and member o the Sanhedrin who was also a almudist and Kabbalist. First knownas Joseph (Joses) the Levite, the Apostles later changed his name. Te Book o Acts (4:36-37)

avors the opinion that he converted to Christianity5 aer Pentecost (about A.D. 29 or 30) then

sold his property and devoted the proceeds to the Church.

A ew years later he deended Pauls conversion by personally introducing the once eared Saulto Peter and James, aer which Paul retired to a sel-imposed exile in his hometown o arsus.Barnabas-A remained in Jerusalem gaining a reputation or exhortation (evangelism) among

the Jews. Aer the death o Stephen at the hands o Saul (Paul, the sel-conessed Phariseeo Pharisees i.e. an adept Kabbalist),6 there had been a dispersion o the nascent sect and

certain unknown disciples, eeing north, had much success getting the rst known convertsamong gentile Greeks in Antioch. On hearing this, James, the brother o Isa and acknowledgedleader o the Sect in Jerusalem, dispatched Barnabas-G to investigate. On conrming the news,

Barnabas-G immediately went to arsus to recruit Paul or mission work among the Gentiles.

We should bear in mind that this sect was a microcosmic restitution o the Mosaic Order,which in essence, is the Spirit o Islam or peaceul surrender to Gods Rule and Sovereignty(Kingdom) as maniest by His Prophets. It was most certainly not the Christianity knownor expounded in any o its many orms or the last 1900 odd years. Furthermore, the term

Christian is an appellation applied to what later became the Pauline action, which aerwards,by expedient convention, then extended to most disciples o Christ in the Western Roman

Empire. It is best to remember that Christ was never the name by which Prophet Isa (or Yeho-shuah) was known by his contemporaries or amily.

Shortly aerwards, Peter visited Antioch along with disciples o James. Te latter companionsstrongly disapproved o Peters rubbing elbows with uncircumcised believers at a non-halal

(non-kosher) table, and here begins the trouble that eventually broke the Primitive Church intotwo actions: the Pauline and Jamesian, with Peter having very little to do with this other than

being a N catalyst. Te predominantly gentile action eventually ascended to dominancesome 2-3 centuries later, declaring that Jesus was God and that God was a rinity; doctrines

that are nowhere to be ound in precedent scriptures:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

5 Conversion to Christianity is a less than accurate construct. At this time, the disciples o Prophet Isa wereknown as Followers o the Way, and essentially were no dierent than other Jews except in their magnanimous

egalitarian generosity and behavior that exemplied trustworthiness o the highest standards o morality. Ianything, this Primitive Church was more Jewish than Jews and more Monotheist than present day Muslims; the

latter because their behavior was awless according to all who observed them.6 See: Alred Eidershiem, Jesus the Messiah, p. 61. Kabbalist and Ismaiili occult doctrines have much in common

with the Freemasonic Lucierian dogma.

15


16/316

W N t gt but G, Ju, n t Spt , n N t x-pun n t tnp ng t t n t t tt t Ctn t . T -t N vn n 2 C 3 t pb tt t u v t tugug n t t txt t p. T nt pp b pt

n t t p nupt t pg. T t N pg G, Ju,

n t Spt, t n t pg, n t ptnt t v ng t ntnt p t nt u t ntn pptv n t ptnt u

t pt un bng .g. ( Pt 3-4.)

-Daniel N. Schowalter, Oxford Companion to the Bible, 1993

t nt, t u n AD 8, nt un n Sptu. tun tugt tt tvn W xt gn n t Ft n, n t b tnt pn n t

t. T H Spt Pnt ubqunt t tt t W, n tu nttt -tn t t Ft. T v n tt Ogn, t ntp

Ptnt nvg t tn vn p ng n nng gnt. Int t ntu, t tn utu nng t t Pn t nt, pt n

t k Cppn Ft4 n Dnu t Pu-Apgt, vp.

- Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church, 1997

O urther note is that the schism described is o little or no import to contemporary Christianbelievers, nor is it consequently discussed in congregational settings. Ignorance and/or denialo the matters signicance and subsequent history remain endemic, as bets any mythical ac-

count proered by victors:

T nnt ntn pttp Ct , n tu Rn Ct t, u- Ctn tn t pvu Rn putn. Wt p nt

n tt ut gtt kn t Nz Bn-St (.. tt nk n -t), ntt t tt gnt ntng Ctn n t nt bu kng

pu pgn t t n t pppt tt n unng n k n-t n t t t!

- Trinity, the Metamorphosis of Myth and Genesis of Terror,Omar Zaid, M.D. Penpress, 2008, p 22.

Up to the Jerusalem Council and or another two - three generations, there is no evidence oany such doctrine. And neither is there evidence the two sects were called Christians until

aer 70AD when itus destroyed Jerusalem.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------8 For urther discussion see the ollowing authors: Ldemann, Paul Apostle to the Gentiles, Heretics, Oppositionto Paul in Jewish Christianity; Painter, Just James; and Bernheim, James Brother o Jesus; and Conzelmann, Acts

o the Apostles; and Haenchen, Acts o the Apostles; and Brandon, Te Fall o Jerusalem and the Christian Church

16


17/316

Te name was conerred by Roman soldiers who conventionally called their own adoptedsavior gods, such as Jupiter, Apollo and Zeus, Christ.Initially, the Jews had called them Na-zoreans or Followers o Te Way (see Acts 24:5) akin to the disciples o Lao se while

AlQuran calls them Nasera. We must also bear in mind that this rst schism was over ritualand not theology.

Although Peter appears to have sided with the disciples o James (the Jerusalem Judaizers orparty o the circumcision as did Barnabas-G who is said to have changed stripes during Pe-ters visit), Pauls rhetoric nevertheless carried the day or the Gentiles who rom thence orth

in Antioch were separated rom the Judaic (circumcised) cum Ebionite church.10 It is recordedthat Paul went so ar as to shame his colleagues in ront o the entire Greek congregation (see

Galatians 2:11-15) or insisting they keep the Covenant o God with Abraham, the preeminentmonotheist Patriarch. But it appears that even this narrative may be another o many interpola-

tions that plague the N.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

10 Te names under which these Jewish Christians appear in the lists o sects provided by the Church Fatherswere originally honorable names in the New estament but their meanings have since deteriorated. Ebionim or

Ebionites, is a re-hebraized ancient title o honor, which the primitive Church adopted, probably aer their ightrom Jerusalem, on the basis o Jesus beatitudes concerning the poor. Tere was no one named Ebion who servedas ather o the sect, as the Church Fathers (Hippolytus, ertullian, Epiphanius, etc.) suggested in order to concealthe groups true origin and to label it more easily as heretical. Te name was chosen by the believers in accordance

with a traditional pattern (e.g., Perusim = Pharisees, Sadducim = Sadducees) (Schoeps, p. 11).

Later, the hatred and satire o opponents reduced Ebionite to a nickname and term o abuse so that the JewishChristians themselves avoided it. Te term has been broadly used by not only the Church Fathers but by almost allwriters. Any group proclaiming Christ and upholding the Mosaic law, regardless o whatever other philosophies,

doctrines, and practices they held, have been lumped together under the term Ebionite.

Te Historic Phenomena and Teology o the Nazarenes and Ebionites,Dan Rogers, Edited by Barbara Parada and Richard C. Nickels, 2003, Worldwide Church o God, Neck City, MO

64849

Jewish Christianity [an oxymoron] never regained its position o authority in the aairs o the Church. TeHadrianic war, which had wrung the death knell o Jewish hopes o political independence, had also relegated theChurch o the apostles to the rank o a heretical sect. Henceorth the Jewish Christians, while they observed theirancestral customs, were practically excluded rom the Catholic Church and might only associate with one another

in their own congregations - Hugh Schoneld,History o Jewish Christianity, London, 1936, p. 62).

17


18/316

Frank McGuire, in Te Posthumous Clash Between Peter and Paul (Te Journal o HigherCriticism, 9/2, 2002, 161-174), makes a case or a much later author (perhaps Marcion) o this

Epistle to the Galatians, and or the specic purpose o justiying Pauls position via the imposi-tion o prejudice that avors the rinitarian position:

Pt tn x gtng, pp pt t ttn n, t tut xpntn. A t t J t nggtn, nung Bnb, v n pt tv. W Pu n n buk Pt (G 2: 3), n b

t ? Atntv, nt t nnt t n J , n, Bnb?Bu t ut bugt Pt t Ant t pup nung Pu nu,

n -ntnt t utn t Apt D b J n t ptn b Pt,Bnb-Gnng t At 5: 3-35vn Pu..5

Such interpolations in the N canon are so endemic they utterly conound any proposal thatthe book, in its entirety, is written vis--vis inspired revelation. Te oldest known manuscript

containing the entire Bible (O and N) is the Codex Sinaiticus which dates rom the ourthcentury and eminently attests to this lack o purity:

Codex Sinaiticus was worked over by correctors long aer it was rst written, one can actuallysee this process o alteration or doctrinal reasons at work.11

Tis venerated text contains none o the now published N reerences to Christs Resurrection!It bears absolutely no mention o a Resurrected Body o Christ, or any o the later additions

reerring to his apparitions beore the ascension. Even the ascension itsel is absent!

Returning to our narrative however, when planning to revisit their previously established and

successul missions throughout Asia Minor and Greece aer the debacle over circumcisionand kosher ood, the two Apostles parted company. Tis was ostensibly because Paul reused topermit John-Mark to accompany them, though many commentators nd this little more than

a polite agreement to disagree. John and Barnabas-G then went to Cypress where it is likelyBarnabas-G remained. It is said he gave the true Prophetic example o earning his own liv-

ing rather than sup rom church largess, and legend has it he died a Martyrs death at Salamis:beaten to death by Jews around 60-61 A.D.

18


19/316

Essentially, little else is known historically o Barnabas-G while much is claimed later by Eccle-siastic opportunists. What Ive related is a prcis o orthodox legend(s) obtained rom docu-ments which cannot be ully historicized including the N canon though there do exist aew conicting records such as the Clementine account where it is said Barnabas-G preached

in Rome while Jesus was alive.

In this account, Clement saves Barnabas-G rom a typical Jewish stoning then ollows him toPalestine. But even this is considered little more than a romance by orthodox scholars anddivines. However, Ferdinand Christian Baur, the ounder o the bingen School o New

estament criticism has oered a dierent perspective.

According to Herr Baur, St. Epiphanius ound the Clementine literature being used by a Uni-tarian, ourth century Ebionite sect that considered Paul apostate. He ound these records

not only avorable to a Unitarian Petrine Church in Jerusalem under James the Just, but alsothought it was a contemporary account written during the lie o both Jesus and the twelve

Apostles; an account in direct conict with those given in the Ns Fourth Gospela gospelmost scholars now agree could not have been written until late in the second century as a mon-ument to conciliatory eorts between the Pauline and Petrine cum Jamesian actions. Baurstheories as to the date o the Clementine epistles have since been soundly debunked, and the

documents are thought to be post-Nicene in nature, but certainly pro-Arian (non-rinitarian).

Apparently, even Julian the Apostate dusted them o with the pen o an interpolator in his waragainst the early Roman Church.6 sets the tone or what certainly became a war o words, let-

ters, gospels, epistles, criticism, polemic and bloodshed:

Pun tn t t gtt ugt n Ctn t: n t

ut n tug t gt Cntu, Rnz ntn nt k nn g t t xuntn np t t t v n.12

Tis is a conict that continues even today to surround the early Christian era regarding thenature o the originally Judean and clearly Abrahamic sect o Prophet Isas disciples (Ebionites)

vs. what later became rinitarian Christianity or the Paulinzed Catholic Church.

19


20/316

he Schism, Part II

I will urther comment on this division o the rst church as well as the primitive sect o Ebion-ites, both o which are lightly treated by those who vehemently object to the GoB:

Unt AD, Ju-CtnF T Wpnt t Cu jt

Pu n n t n n t n. J, t bt Ju,pnt t Ju-Ctn p, bt ung t Ju pp t PunCtnt. J u Sn, n Cp n un t I. t ut b t-tbut t t tng xp t v I [ v bn xu

t N - z] Ev, t Ju-Ctn unt vp b t Punn, n b tun v

- Quoted from: A New Representation of the Origins of Christianityby Cardinal Danielou, 1967

Ang t Pubu At Tu (-8), Gk Rtn n Ctn tn.Wp t Ctn pu ntt vn tn tt t J.

- See Durants History, vol. III: Caesar & Christ

Te covenant o Circumcision13 established by Allah with Prophet Ibrahim is an everlastingcovenant that Paul unilaterally canceled with a ew lashes o his mercurial tongue and perhaps

pen.

14

No other writer o N canon conrms his singular renunciation o this divine dictumand the O lacks both precedent and prophetic indication or such a monocratic dispensation.o this writer, it smacks o revisionism propounded or the political ascension o the RomanSee. Tere are several reerences in the O to gentiles converting to hani monotheism uponwhich all (only males) were required to undergo circumcision, and it is clear rom the early

Judeo-Christian literature that Jerusalems Ebionite Church continued the sacred tradition, asalso did prophet Isa. Tat Barnabas-G is associated with this tradition as per the Clementine

literature and N deserves its share o consideration as this narrative

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------12 rinity, Te Metamorphosis o Myth and Genesis o error, by Omar Zaid, Penpress Publications, Brighton,

England, 2008, p. 21. See also: Ramsay Macmullen, op.cit.

13 Te Covenant o Circumcision is recorded as an Everlasting Covenant which gives urther O evidenceagainst the Pauline assertion to the contrary (Genesis 17:13 below). Te text urther states that any uncircum-

cised man shall be cut o rom Allahs people or having broken the everlasting covenant. Tis cannot possibly bereconciled with Pauline doctrine:

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised; and My covenantshall be in your esh or an everlasting covenant.

- rans. by Jewish Publication Society anakh

14 We cannot be certain that Paul wrote the Epistles attributed to him. Tis had been suspected or some time and

it is now generally accepted that no one knows who wrote his amous Epistle to the Hebrews. Some suggest it mayhave been Barnabas A, but the truth o the matter is no one knows who wrote any o the New estament books.

20


21/316

unolds, especially aer reviewing an o ignored passage rom the N regarding Paul, romTe Book o Acts: 21:21:

Yu bt, n tun bv t ng t J, t zuup t . T v bn t tt u t J v ng t tn t

tun M, n tt u t t nt t u t n n bv t ut . . . T b u t tt u v . S t t u. W v un un v. Jn t, ung t t putn t t, n pt xpn Tn vb untn tt t n tut n t t t but

u, but tt u u bv t .

Tis admonishment and counsel is given by the Jerusalem apostles (James and Peter) to Paulon his last visit (twenty years aer his conversion). Te account goes on to record that Paul didas requested, including the shaving o his head as do Muslims or Haj. Even so, such uror arose

he was arrested on the emple steps and eventually taken to Rome or trial and subsequent

execution.

Te passage raises serious problems or rinitarians but is never discussed in Christian congre-gations or conerences. Te Paul o the N canon was either a hypocrite or the letterswe have

only transcribed copiesascribed to him are oerings o expedient emendations rom laterrinitarian adepts who were also Semitically-challenged! Tere is little ground outside apolo-getic gymnastics to reconcile this passage with the theology expressed in the epistles ascribed

to him. Being all things to all men as he purportedly wrote, makes Paul a doctrinal chameleonin light o the signicant contradiction presented in the above passage. In closing this abridged

section, I oer pertinent remarks rom another scholar o Higher Criticism:

Hv tt b, t nn-Pun gn t ntptn pg t n n t b tn. Nt n 2 [A.D.], but n t pvu ntu, R pvttn, t n v, n v t ttn n tn t-tn. On t unvng t u-t tntn n t txt t nnn t tug, t nn n t ttn, k vb t bgnnng

t Rn unt. On ttn v up t t n v up t -t. Pp t tu pn n nttng p t t tn . A I tnk I b t b kng n t n v b, t Rn Cu nt t n t gv

t pt Pt n Pu; t, t Rn gn t n ntu bu t Nnngv t t Pun unt.

THE NON-PAULINE ORIGIN OF THE PARALLELISMOF THE APOSTLES PETER AND PAUL. GALATIANS 2:7-8;

Ernst Barnikol, Journal of Higher Criticism, 5/2 (Fall 1998), 285-300

21


22/316

Tis renowned scholar asserts that the oundation o the church later called Catholic is thato the Pauline persuasion alone rather than the popularized myth o both Peter and Paul withPeter as its Rock. Te amous N passage reerring to Peters initial Papal mandate is ar romany literal reduction justiying such an oce [see Appendix I or a complete discussion o this

deception]. Rather, in my opinion, the passage reers to the autonomous metaphysical guidance

o Allah (nur) that permitted Peter to recognize Prophet Isa as the Jewish Messiah.15

I includea ew verses rom Galatians in order to demonstrate the polemic urther, as well as to establish

what appears to be the hani monotheism o Barnabas-G:

Wn Pt t Ant, I pp t , bu n t ng.B tn n J, u t t t t Gnt. But n t v, bgn t bk n pt t Gnt bu t bng t t un gup. T t J jn n p, tt b t

p vn Bnb t.

(Galatians 2:11-14) New International Version

Te modern vernacular in this recent translation helps put the controversy into perspective;one that carries rather more serious implications indicating that either: (1) Paul was at an

extreme o doctrinal enmity with the Petrine cum Jamesian Ebionites; or (2) whoever laterwrote or transcribed the Galatian Epistle was an avowed anti-Semite who utilized the Apostolic

authority o Pauls renown or doctrinal purposes. Te most skeptical o Critics consider theEpistles o Paul to be authentic (whatever that means), but to assume then that Paul and Barn-

abas-G parted company over John-Mark in light o this grave doctrinal dispute is the heighto a naivet that reects not only ignorance o the pseudo-historicity and divinity o what is

called the N Canon, but also o simplistic aith in literal reductions used by propagandists to

achieve political unity.

rue Pharisees: Barnabas, the NameIll make an abbreviated attempt to clariy usage o the title: Son o God and then relate this

term to Barnabas-G.

T un bng n t t ntu Dvn, Sn G, G, nG G, tt L, R, Lbt, n Sv t W... t

Ctn pbb tnk tt t tt gn t n unqu pp t Ct.But b Ju v xt, t t bng t C Augutu... T [ C-

tn] tkng t ntt t Rn p n gvng t t J pnt. Et tt pu jk n v pn, t t t Rn jt n

g tn.

John Dominic Crossan, God and Empire, 2007, p. 28

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

15 But tt I ? Pt tn nnt n: Tu t t Ct, t Sn t vng G(Matt 16:15-16)

22


23/316

Pais or Paida is a Greek word that can mean son, manservant or servant. It is liberallyused throughout the N, and in some o the latters plentiul versions it is translated as son

almost every time it appears in relation to Jesus. Others, such as the NKJV, use servant. In therst passage below, Peter is addressing his congregation:

Yu t n t ppt, n t vnnt G t u t, ng tAb, An n u t t t b b. u t, G, v-ng up H Svnt Ju, nt H t b u, n tunng v n u

nqut.(Acts 3:25-26:)

B vnt, I v n.(Matthew 12:18)

T G Ab, n I....t g vnt Ju.

(Acts 3:13)

F tut gnt t vnt Ju, tu t nnt....(15 Acts 4:27)

In addition, the phrase Son o God has been ound in the Dead Sea Scrolls as the title o apious ellow other than Jesus, and throughout the O the phrase Son, i.e. Servant, o Godis liberally used in reerence to prophets, kings, angels, and even the entire nation o Israel.

Tereore, no precedent or evidence exists or the establishment o Christs divinity outside thetraditional hero worship o the pagans, and many o these demigods were atheists who usedreligion as a means to paciy minions in order to comortably extract their wealtha rather

sophisticated ne art that presently approaches its apotheosis with the New World Order andits World Council o Churches. o corroborate the thesis, Al-Qur-an [3:78] has this to oer:

T M nv n t b vnt A, n t v ng.

Servant-hood is the principle example upon which is based the ount o humility that Godrepeatedly lls with His grace or those who truly submit to Him. It is this ethical attitude

and pious posture o soul that distinguishes as per the GoB rue Pharisees rom thosewho held public sway16 during the lie o Isa; a group he sternly rebuked as hypocrites. What isrelevant to our narrative is that rue Pharisees were/are directly associated with the School o

Prophets as renewed by Elijah (another Servant o God) on Mt. Carmel, who were sometimescalled Essenes or Nazarenes17 as was Prophet Isa, or Nazarites as were Prophets Samuel and thewarrior Judge Samson (a Danite also). Nazarene comes rom the Hebrew root nazara which

means truth.7

23


24/316

It is also o note that there was no city o Nazareth during the advent o Isa. 8 Te requent reer-rals to it as a place are actually Gnostic reerences to either a spiritual station o initiation or a

hidden chamber in one o the cults many retreats.18

Returning to Acts 3:25 quoted above, Peters use o the phrase sons o the prophets is a direct

reerence to the Nazarite College that attempted to preserve prophetic doctrines both in spiritand deed; a group that stood in stark contrast to the Jewish leaders with whom the Ebionite

Church contended. In both social and traditional contexts, the phrase implies the trans-gener-ational imputation o a prooundly pious attitude to the entire nascent Jamesian community by

virtue o their sincere discipleship, as is also expressed by the phrase Followers o the Way.

In essence, this MOUN CARMEL RADIION (Elijahs Mountain) became a collective ur-ban eort, threatening the hegemony o Jewish hypocrites as the true restoration o the Mosaic

and Abrahamic Covenants in anticipation o the prophesied advent o Paracletos or Mo-hammad (pbh) with the subsequent second advent o Isa at the end o days. Tese Nazorians

conrmed Gods Kingdom individually by making their peace with God via Islamic submis-sion as did Abraham and Moses. Ten they applied it corporately in anticipation o the reestab-lishment o Gods emporal Kingdom o the prophesied earthly power given to the Paracletos,

Ahmad.

On the other hand, and eventually, the Pauline Roman Church usurped this dominion arti-cially via erce temporal persecutions and thuggish murders aer polemics ailed to subdue

the Ebionite Nazorians.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

16 Te Pharisees sought to perectly keep every minute detail o the Jewish Law, taking their zeal to the point thatthey became legalistic, judgmental, condescending, and even violent at times.

Mel C. Montgomery, Christian Evangelist17 John oland made reerences to the Italian version o the GoB in his Nazarenus or Jewish, Gentile and Ma-hometan Christianity (1718). oland reviewed the manuscript via J.C. Cramer in Amsterdam. Trough Prince

Eugene o Savoy it came to the Austrian National Library where it has since been preserved in Die Handschrien-sammlung der sterreichischen Nationalbibliothek

18 See: Jesus Te Man: A New Interpretation rom the Dead Sea Scrolls, Barbara Teiring, ransworld Publishing[one o the original scholars now banished rom the team because o this book].

24


25/316

It is thereore reasonable when Pro. Blackhirst suggests that the name Barnabas is a kind oellipsis representing the continuum o this School o the Prophets (see Appendix V), in whichcase the GoB could be easily be identied by its very title as an Ebionite text, and here, Ebion-ite is loosely equated with the Jerusalem Church under James the Just; the group continuingthe pure hani monotheism as restored by prophet Isa, without any reied reduction later at-

tributed to the phrase, Son o God.

John oland (1718) argued that the Gospel o Barnabas was not a modern orgery, but rathera Muslim reworking o the apocryphal Gospel reerred to in early Christian documents. Terewas a Levite o Cypriot origin called Joseph whom the apostles surnamed Barnabas [or parak-

leseo] (which means son o exhortation). 19

Te name Barnabas is thereore likely derived rom nabi (prophet) which easily renders sonor servant o the prophet because Bar means son; hence giving us Bar Nabi. Te actual Greekword translated above as exhortation is parakleseos, and mirrors Paraclete rom Jesus teach-

ings in the Fourth Gospel.

20

Pro. Blackhirst associates the term with advocacy and consola-tion, the major characteristics o all prophetic messages and persons, qualities which Joseph,the Cypriot Levite evidently possessed.21

However, there may be even greater signicance carried by this name: Te GoB makes severalreerences to the Elijian School and Te Little Book o Elijah not now extant which gave

specic guidelines or the ascetic aspirations o this school o rue Pharisees or Sincere Seekerso God.22

Cirillo and Frmaux ... contrary to most Western scholars, argue that the Gospel o Barnabas isprobably based on an early Judeo-Christian document, whereas the existing version (in hand)

only dates to the ourteenth century.

Tey suggest the ollowing line o tradition behind the present gospel:

(1) an early Christian background,(2) a medieval collector, and

(3) an Islamic reviser in the sixteenth century.

Cirillo and Frmaux ocus on the expression true Pharisees as a possible clue to monastic,Jewish-Christian groups that may have held views similar to those reected in the Gospel o

Barnabas. Tese groups seem to have regarded Elijah as the main precursor o Jesus (c. hencethe reerences to the little book o Elijah in Ch. 145), and may have had Syria as their main

base.... More recently, Teodore Pulcini has taken the reerences to Elijah and the true Phari-sees as an argument or a possible Carmelite origin to the Gospel o Barnabas. 23 I should add

that Proessor Blackhirst agrees with the Carmelite thesis.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------19 History as a Literary Weapon: Te Gospel o Barnabas in Muslim-Christian Polemics; Journal: Studia Teo-

logica 2002:1 (pp. 4-26). Oddbjrn Leirvik.20 Te N passage is Attributed to Luke, Acts 4:36 parakleseo: Admonitory, encouraging and consolatoryexhortation...: H. Cremer. Biblio-Teological Lexicon o New estament Greek, Edinburgh, 1872, pp. 336-337

25


26/316

Te N also reers to Isa as having been mistaken or Elijah, whom the O teaches was takento Heaven alive (translated) as was Enoch and as the Quran also says o Isa. Under this etymol-

ogy and according to the common use o these interchangeable phrases, Son o Exhortationreadily becomes Son o or better said Servant o the Prophets in recognition o a personspious status and his/her aliation with the pure stream o prophetic traditions attributed to

rue Pharisees. In a sense, and as an analogy, the Church o James the Just was a communityo genuine Sus minus speculative mysticism.

Tese ontological parallels unmistakably represent the spirit o monotheisms prophetic geneal-ogy and heritage vis--vis the Nazarite prophets o ancient Israel;24 one o whom was Prophet

Samuel who ounded the rst School o the Prophets (see Appendix V). Aer Samuel, thedivinely sanctioned authority split between the oces o Prophet and King, although briey

united in both David and Solomon. And here it is imperative to remember that Allahs permit-ting the Hebrew monarchy was ocially recorded as their rejection o Allahs Monarchy or

Guidance or Kingdom: i.e., Te Hebrews ocially rejected Te Kingdom o God and it was

entered in their scripture. Tis is not a light matter:

An t L unt Su: Hkn unt t v t pp t v nt jt- u but t v jt M, tt I u nt gn v t.

- I Sam 8: 8

I posit it was because o this School o the Prophets, as continued via the college o Ebioniteelders, that Mohammad cautioned Muslims not to molest monasteries such as those o the

Carmelites25 who claimed to have inherited the tradition.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

21 WAS HREE AN EARLY GOSPEL OF BARNABAS , Journal o Higher Criticism, R. Blackburn22 Includes the story o two hermits at the time o Elijah (ch.: 48-150), presented as the true Pharisees (c. 144-

145, 151), related to prophets Hosea and Haggai.23 Odd bjrn Leirvik., op.cit also see: Luigi Cirillo and Michel Frmaux, vangile de Barnab, Recherches sur le

composition et lorigine. exte et traduction (Paris: Beauchesne, 1977); also see: Teodore Pulcini, In the Shadowo Mount Carmel: the Collapse o the Latin East and the Origins o the Gospel o Barnabas, Islam and Christian-

Muslim Relations vol. 12 no. 2 (2001), p. 191-209.

24 Nazarite: Te name given by the Hebrews to a person set apart and especially consecrated to the Lord. Al-though Nazarites are not unknown to early Hebrew history, the only specic reerence to them in the Law is inNum. (vi, 1-21), a legal section o late origin, and embodying doubtless a codication o a long-standing usage.

Te regulations here laid down reer only to persons consecrating themselves to God or a specied time in virtueo a temporary vow, but there were also Nazarites or lie, and there are even indications pointing to the consecra-tion o children to that state by their parents. [Prophet Samuel was one o the latter-OZ] - Catholic Encyclopedia25 One must not conuse the present Catholic Carmelite Orderwho can only historically trace their origin to

the Crusadeswith those persons who dwelt previously on the mount where Elijah slew the 400 Prophets oBaal rom the Danite tribe. Te Catholics usurped these traditions and re-devoted them to Mary instead o God.All thats le o Mt. Carmels relation with the Ebionite Church is their veneration o Prophet Elijah and ascetichabituations. Doctrinally, everything else has been subjected to the Catholic deviation. [see Appendix II or the

relevance o this ribe to the New World Order]

26


27/316

With Mohammad, the spiritual and temporal regencies were reinstated in prophethood, andwere then intended to reside with the Caliph and Council o Elders (qh-sura) until the returno Prophet Isaacknowledging also that Isa rejected a Monarchial Crown as did Mohammad.

Tereore, the cogent monotheist may conclude that our worldly dynasties and sundry autocra-cies all all ar short o the Divine intent, and as such, cannot possibly be truly guided.

Te Pauline rinitarian departure rom this intrinsically prophetic tradition is similarly incon-trovertible as regards unclean oods, wine drinking, circumcision and its many accretions rom

pagan idolatry.9 From here it is best to quote the Master Critic and let him leave us a partingthought on the name o Barnabas:

Rkb, tug, Luk ptv tg qu t t ntnt t k[GB]. T Mn tn n t v Bnb, npb t Sn t Pp-t t, un upn t Pt tn t Fut Gp.26 In t unt

t v k nnt Mu t M Ju pp; n kng J-u t unn t t M t ut upn t Fut Gp pt Ju

t unn t Pt t . It pb n t t xtt Mun t k n upp Pt nt. It qut vnt tt t ut nt kng Mu bgp vn gn gng . Mu tt tn n n Bnb.2 Wn v tt n n Mn tng b n t t Pt (nv ppt untn). T pnunu t Pt t nnnt t Luk tv tg t n Bnb.

Was there an Early Gospel of Barnabas, R. Blackhirst, pp.19-20

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

26 See, or instance, in Chap. 42 o GoB where Isa speaks o the Messenger o God whom you call Messiah, who

was made beore me, and shall come aer me, and shall bring the words o truth... Te phrase and shall bringwords o truth alludes to the Paraclete, Spirit o ruth, rom Jhn 14:17. Similarly, in Chap. 97: but my consolationis in the coming o the Messenger, who shall destroy every alse opinion o me... is based in Johns Paraclete -R.B.

27 Christian critics tend to argue that the work is deeply, inherently Islamic (and thereore a Muslim orgery.)But it is quite clear that the name Muhammad is not essential to the works Messianic doctrine. It is equally clearthat the Messianic doctrine is based in the Paraclete sections o Jesus discourses in the Fourth Gospel. Te author

knew the Fourth Gospel well and the hadith o Muhammad not at all. Nor, should it be said, does the authordisplay any direct knowledge o the Koran; on the contrary, there are several key ways in which the work atly

contradicts the Koran, the nomination o Muhammad as Messiah among them. On the other hand, the identica-tion o the Paraclete (but not the Messiah) with Muhammad comes naturally to the Muslim mind. ibid., R.B.

27


28/316

he Gospel of Barnabas: Historicity and Criticism

W t v Bnb gt b g t t pp pp,28

t nvt ntng k pnun Jn t. It pnt kbtng t nt t J Ju tt pp u t Ebnt J-Ctn

t tt t t Enn n J.

R. Blackhirst10

Well return to Pro. Blackhirsts excellent criticism and analysis o the GoB as well as theJamesian moti in the next section. For now, Id like to briey review the commonly quoted

historicity o the now popularized text. O the gallantly oered reerences certiying the exist-ence o a primitive manuscript called the GoB, only two have any basis in historicity: Te

Gelasian Decree and Te List o Sixty Books.29

All others are hearsay. Not a ew Muslims have been imprudent, even ardently misleading, inthe assertion that the GoB was accepted as a well known Canonical ext in the Churches o

Alexandria. In addition to this misstatement, the so-called Decree o Pope Damasus (304-384C.E.) allegedly condemning the Gospel by name cannot be substantiated nor can Irae-neuss supposed reerences to the GoB. Again, we must place some trust in Pro. Blackhirst:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

28 Apocrypha, pl. n. [treated as sing. or pl.] 1 (the Apocrypha) biblical or related writings appended to the Oldestament in the Septuagint and Vulgate versions, not orming part o the accepted canon o Scripture. 2 (apoc-rypha) writings or reports not considered genuine. ORIGIN ME: rom eccles. L. apocrypha (scripta) hidden

(writings), rom Gk apokruphos, rom apokruptein hide away.Oxord Dict. 10th Edition.

29 Te Gelasian Decree is considered a orgery but is not later than the sixth century. Te List o Sixty Books iso eastern provenance and is as old as the seventh century. Both lists, it should be noted, probably drew on earlierlists, including those supplied through Jerome. Barnabas and the Gospels: Was Tere an Early Gospel o Barna-

bas? R. Blackhirst, JHC 7/1 (Spring 2000), 1-22

28


29/316

T Gn D n t Lt Sxt Bk , kn, npnnt t: ggp n t Et n n t Wt; n t t pt

b t t ntu... T t , n tv, tgu t bk tt t bpv n t tt t b t n t Cu pgn t t t vn tCtn g t t xun t. W u nt b t up t n tt, n t

, t k n qutn t. But t nvb tt n t Gp Bnb, t k t n t tgu, t pnv? ... T pnt t t v tt t Gn D n t Lt Sxt Bk nt bt tkn; tpbb n Gp Bnb. T ptv vn, nt pt n t t,utg t ngtv vn, k btng nt ut t t t (

bt t) n k uvvng gnt... Wt t tnp t t -v k? T t t gun bvng tt t nttunt t n tkng t

t v gp v t n Bnb tt t t. I t n Gp Bnb, t xtnt t t v k b t pt Ebntpnt v b xpn b ntnut t t k. At t, t nt

t k pnt t t ttu n Bnb n, tng n bt n t v gp. T pnt t t pnn tt t v k ntn t t ubtn k; t n Bnb ntg t t v

k tn t tptng t xpn t ubtn b uppng tt t Gp Bnb uvv nt t M Ag t pt t n pup.

Blackhurst30

In my review o the literature thus ar, this learned opinion on the matter at hand is amongstthe most qualied to be had presently. However, or the sake o completeness, we must trace

the course o the present text(s).

Te earliest reerence amongst Occidentals to the GoB now in hand comes rom the renownedOrientalist, George Sale in the introductory remarks o his translation into English o the Ko-

ran (1734) [see Appendix IV].

He assigns the Spanish translation o an Italian GoB text to Mostaa de Aranda (most likelya Spanish Morisco Muslim),31 and attributes the gospels availability to a ather Marino who

removed it rom the library o Pope Sixtus V (1585-90) while the Pope slept. According to theSpanish text, Fra Marino read the GoB and immediately became a Muslim. Other grandilo-quent reerences associating the GoB with earlier Popes and private libraries are claimed but

none are substantiated, and except or Mr. Sales and the Italian manuscripts introduction,even Fra Marinos visit to the Popes library is unconrmed.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

30Ibid, R. Blackhirst, JHC 7/1 (Spring 2000), 1-22.@ http://www.depts.drew.edu/jhc/artread.html

29


30/316

Nevertheless, the story makes good copy, as does the proered legend included in the intro-duction o several Muslim publications that the GoB was ound clutched to the breast o the

orgotten saints cadaver. Tis latter book, according to legitimate legend, was actually the Gos-pel o Matthew and not the GoB. 11

Aer reviewing the Italian Manuscript, John oland deended the GoB in his book Nazarenus

(1718), which Justin Champion re-edited in 1999; but aside rom this ephemeral urry, noth-ing much was known or said o the gospel until its translation into English in 1907 by Lauraand Lonsdale Ragg, again rom the Italian manuscript 32 as published by Oxord University/Clarenden Press. Tis was ollowed in 1908 by an Arabic translation published in Egypt by

Khalil Saadah, a Syrian-Orthodox Christian. In their introduction, L & L Ragg included theirstudied opinions, conrmed now by scholars (both Muslim and not), that the manuscript was

most likely a work o medieval orgery.

Albeit they and others do admit that the textcomplete with three layers o interpolationsdrawn rom (1) Dante, (2) Episcopal intrigues, and (3) apologetic ancywas indeed based on

a core but unknown earlier text not yet discovered.Nonetheless, Muslim publishers have omitted the Raggs erudite commentary and orged ahead

with the unounded supposition that the long lost Injiil [Sayings o Jesus] had been redis-covered. Arabic and Urdu (1916) translations are also in circulation, 33 each o which lack the

introduction cum admonition oered by L & L Ragg. Tis is not to mention new Muslim-Eng-lish editions o their work, which also lack the Raggs commentary as well as the recent criticalassessments mentioned briey herein. Needless to say this is less than satisactory. However, Ipresent the ollowing Orientalist overstatement or the sake o air scrutiny and balance o the

polemic.

A g t Gp Bnb t, t n qutn tt t v g. Apt Itn nupt xt pp t b tntn Spn gn( xt n pt), ttn t u v t Mu t t. It ntn nn n t n t M Ag n nt b, n gb pnn I tn, ng t Ppt t M, I nt . Bt ntn t, tt t p t Gp, t t-

ng BA t Kn.34

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

31 An Aragonese Muslim resident in Istanbul. Moriscos were Muslims orced to convert to Christianity then later

deported. Te known Spanish manuscript was lost in the eighteenth or nineteenth centuries; however an eight-eenth century copy o it was discovered in the 1970s in the University o Sydneys Fisher Library among the bookso Sir Charles Nicholson, labeled in English ranscribed rom ms. in possession o the Revd Mr. Edm. Callamy

who bought it at the decease o Mr. George Sale...and now gave me at the decease o Mr. John Nickolls, 1745. J. E.Fletcher, Te Spanish Gospel o Barnabas, Novum estamentum vol. XVIII ((1976), pp. 314-320.

32 Te complete text o the Italian manuscript has been published in photo-acsimile; with a French translationand extensive commentary and textual apparatus: Cirillo L. & Fremaux M. Evangile de Barnabe: recherches sur lacomposition et lorigine, Paris, 1977, p. 598. Te text o the Spanish manuscript has been published with extensive

commentary: Bernabe Pons L. F. El Evangelio de San Bernabe; Un evangelio islamico espanol, Universidad deAlicante, 1995, 260p ... and it should be noted that this text lacks chapters 121 to 200 as compared to the Italian.

33 also Persian, Indonesian and urkish, French by Cirillo and Frmaux, modern Italian, modern Spanish, Dutchand German. See Schirrmacher: Mit den Waen des Gegners, p. 346-352 and Slomp,Te Gospel o Barnabas ...,

p. 87.

30


31/316

In the Italian manuscript, F Mn k pun png nnt b ub-tntt tt n pt n t Cut Inqutn t t:

. t xtn t GB n pn unt ntng2. t xun gnun pt txt t N; n

3. n unknn k b Inu, ng gnt Pu t xtt t GB.

T tt ntnt p pnt t b t Cnn n P. Bkt nt t Vtn ntgu:

T GB pp b Cn Gu Snt t nnt Cn Mntn n A-n Cnn. H tv bntn vng, -n, g z n p-

t vg. T k t - Gp Bnb - upp t b t ntv n n tn b tvng t t pt Bnb n t 5t C ppk At Bnb. T gn t k pbb Cpu n t nt Eup ng

t upptng ttu tug Mn pbb t 5, t b ntxt bng t Cpu t t uk n t ttg Ctn n t unt-tn -ng t Btt Lpnt. A t uvv, Snt ung t k t nnt t Cnn

n xp ttn n t ng t nbt n g g.

R. Blackhirst35

I have not accessed Pro. Blackhirsts evidence or this plausible thesis, which presents a rea-sonable explanation or the anachronisms and interpolations in the text. Te historicity o thePrincipals involved is established and Santorios motive, among others, was to access private

libraries in order to discover and conscate any and all heretical texts:

Snt nt t xp ttn tt upp t v xt ng t C-nn, tv n Mn, n t t t n Bnb ... Mv, Mn, k t

un Mn, St. Bnb t Apt t ptn. T Mn vv tvntn t Bnb n t 52. C B t n t 5 ...tvtng t ptn bp Mn n nt v gntn.

B pn t Bnbt n Bnb vv n Mn. T Cnn nvvn t. Snt g t Spn n tng n pttng n tunn Spn ntt n ntn It. A Gp Bnb n t ntxt t Mn Bnb vv n t Cnn nntn t t B n Sz Mn... T tng k tt t t txt ntn n t P n n t

GB t txt n t t t GB n tt n pt Snt xpng ntu t ttu tvng t t n Bnb.

- ibid

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

34 Cyril Glasse, Te Concise Encyclopedia o Islam, Harper & Row, 1989, p. 6435 Notes owards a Comprehensive Solution to the Riddles o the medieval Gospel o Barnabas, Journal o

Higher Criticism, 2005

31


32/316

Te word heresy here must be seen in light o Catholic Orthodoxy, whatever it was at thetime, as they have a distinct pattern o shiing doctrinal winds as do all imperialists. Rivalrybetween Italian and Spanish actions ollowing the Battle o Leponto12 were rie and so wastraditional Palatine conspiracy between the various Satanic actions o ancient Latins13 and

Jewish inltrators like Danites, Benjamites and pseudo-Jews such as the Khazars and this isnot to mention the Germans, et. alia. It seems Pro. Blackhirst has looked beyond polemics and

should be appointed Chie Inspector o this hotly contested piece o literature.

T pvt vnt gn t Btt Lpnt. H t Ctn gu t t uk,but t t t xpn Cpu. Cpu t L Mut t n 5. T Ltn Cu Cpu , n t Mn. (T Bnb vv n Mn un B pn t

t t Cpu Cu). Pt t bkgun t t GB bttn v t t ttCtn bnn Cpu n t tn Mtnn t t uk. It -

tv t n t Cu. T Mu n.... T n Eupn Ctnu qu bnnng t t N Et. Snt ptng t t.

T Cnn/B/Cvnt t Lpnt gt Ctn vt (t

Funtn t M n t Bnb Pzz n t un Mn) n n t t gt uk vt ( Cpt pnt v). B xtnn, Snt png tt t

unn t tx ttn Cpu ptng t Cpt .

- ibid

Another author substantiates Pro. Blackhirst, albeit with an apposite thesis:Bernab Pons is careul not to speak o orgeries in a derogatory way. He suggests that the

Morisco literature be taken as an expression o ideas harbored by people who participated intwo religious realities, Christian and Muslim... he points to the Morisco authors Ahmad al-

Hayr Bejerano (Granada/Morocco) and Ibrhm al-aybil (oledo/unis, his Spanish namewas Juan Perz). In a document rom 1634, attributed to al-aybil, explicit reerence is made tothe Gospel o Barnabas. Bernab Pons also shows how aybil, in one o his poems, reproducesone o the most peculiar aspects o the Gospel o Barnabas, namely the contention that the real

Messiah was not Christ but Muhammad. 36

Ive rerained rom reviewing other critics or the sake o saving both space and neurons, asmuch o it is distasteully polemic. Besides, weve enough to do, each o us, and I see little pur-pose aer presenting the most lucid thesis extant. Reerences to other critics who are notewor-thy are in the Appendices and Bibliography. And I should add that I had no idea Pro. Blackh-irst was a Muslim until I accidentally discovered the act towards the end o my data gathering

and writing. Actually, I thought he was a reormed Orientalist, an exceptional Scholar, andthe kind o Christian whom Ghandi would have admired. He deserves kudos rom both sideso the Nile. Is his thesis the nal word? I think not as I attempt to explain in the next section.However, I ully accept that Pro. Blackhirsts explanation is a bit like D-Day at Normandyitmarks the beginning o the end aer the combined eorts o all whove challenged this shad-

owy enigma.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

36 Oddbjrn Leirvik, op.cit. see also: BNM Ms. 9653 -- c. de Epalza: Le milieu hispano-moresque ..:, p. 176 and

Bernab Pons, Zur Wahrheit und Echheit ..:, p. 174. / p. 151.

32


33/316

In Closing: Commentary on he Kingdom of God

Apparently, Dr. Abbas Mahmoud Al Aqqad o Al Azhar has cautioned Muslims not to utilizethe GoB in any manner. Tough I cannot conrm this censure I do not concur, yet I add the

ollowing caution. I agree that the book in its present ormespecially as currently publishedby injudicious Muslimsis ar rom being a means o guidance in unlearned hands. However,with scholarly eort and divine direction, I think the core message o the GoB can and shouldbe made available. So ar, such eorts have been hindered by Romes intractable machinations,

not the least o which is that as is the case or many documents that oend papist tempo-ral advantages as also did two to three hundred other gospels or early Church Fathers theoriginal GoB manuscript most likely rests in a secreted vault under Jesuit lock and key. Aer

all, authentic apostolic succession is not a light matter to the Roman See, and Islams claim orMohammads status is unlikely to please these men o crimson and black, because their claim

to authentic divine guidance is what the GoB steadastly reutes.

As a precedent, in Te Hidden Book in the Bible (Harper Collins, 1998), Pro. R. L. Friedmanlaboriously uncovers the core biblical story describing the continuum o Apostolic Author-ity as a divinely sanctioned pattern rom Adam to Solomon. Pursuant to this side o Semite

genealogy, and o relevant note to this present study, is that aer Solomon the singular govern-ing authority o Gods authentic temporal Kingdom divided and never reunited as divinely-

sanctioned regency under the prophetic mantle, though ample opportunity was given to Israel.In my opinion, the principle o divinely-authorized prophetic government is the revealed

and only pattern o earthly regency sanctioned as the Kingdom o God or Heaven with ElYah or Allah37 as King as opposed to human pretenders; and this Teocentric as opposed to

Teocratic (i.e. government by priests), is the crux o religious polemics. Here, at the root oauthentic Apostolic Authority, is the core message o the GoB upon which medieval interpola-tors wrought their troublesome mischie.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

37 Elah or Alah is another orm o Elohim: a combination o El or Strength and Alah or Swear. See Strongs 425and Scoelds Reerence Bible, First Edition, where it is recorded that Allah had been deleted rom the revised

text. It is also thought to be a combination o two other words meaning the God, and is used in reerence to Godmore than 2500 times in the O. All invocations in Islam denitely identiy Allah with Te God o Abraham andnot some tree- or moon-god as is commonly taught by many illiterate pastors whove never read AlQuran. Te

etragrammaton: YHWH, pronounced Yahveh, in original orm is Yah. El was used as Lord, King, or Chie . Tecombination El-Yah or Lord-God is quite sensible, and it is not inconceivable that El-Yah, Al-Yah, or the Aramaic

Eli reportedly spoken on the cross, are derived rom this use. Te rst inscription bearing the name Yahveh isound on the amous Moabite Stone and is o Kennite genesis. YHWH means I AM WHO AM or I BE.

See: Yahweh, Yashua & You by Gail Melvin, 1998, ISBN 0-9665602-0-5#98-91512, an excellent treatise on the derivation and deletion of

Gods name from the Biblical texts, including scholarly references.

33


34/316

Despite the present evangelical erments, the N is not about salvation via blood sacrice andmost especially not via human immolation, which is the typical pagan thesis. And though thereis ample evidence that Satan requires human blood or his ephemeral benecence, blood is nota substance required or Gods avor and urthermore, except or interpolators such as Paul andGreco-gnostic sympathizers, Prophet Isa (Jesus) is never recorded to say that mankinds salva-

tion depended on his blood:

. ,, ; ;

.

On n n n xpt n t t up t tt Ju. , k, t ut I t nt tn ? Wt ttn n t L? p.

(Luke 10:25-26)

: , ; : ; .

, .

An b n n t : G t, t g I tt I v vtng? Ju k , W k but t g? T n n g. I

u nt t gt nt tt , u ut kp t nnt.

(Matthew 19:16-17)

Tese seem like straightorward statements, as is the case in ninety-ve per cent o the GoBstext. Te passage quoted ails to mention aith in a man-gods exsanguination in-vivo as pre-requisite or permission to enter Paradise!38 Here, Isa directs a rich young man to reject materi-

alism and obey the commandments o God, making it exceptionally clear that salvation de-pends on obedience to Musas reasonable Decalogue when read in context. Te core text o thenon-interpolated N is a proclamation and reminder, as well as a warning to Jews specically

and gentiles in general o this condition.

It also announces the coming restitution o both the temporal and metaphysical Kingdoms oGod, and gives instructions or guidance while awaiting the earthly regency; the same domin-

ion lost to Israel vis--vis its continual disobedience. Te metaphysical Kingdom Within wasmade readily available by grace through obedience and good deeds as described by the Mosaiccharter. Te Ns core gospel also makes it very clear that Te Kingdom o God is exactly

what it says it is with God as absolute yrant; and this to the exclusion o all human or non-human pretenders. Furthermore, even in its disturbingly contorted renditions, the N is an

announcement by Prophets John and Isa that the restoration o Gods temporal Kingdom is athand.

34


35/316

o the contrary however, Isa also says My Kingdom is not o this world, and yet again, TeKingdom o God is within you. Well then, this does beg the question o human posturing

barring prophetic directive, and since Isa made it clear that his Kingdom is not here, why thendo Romanists insist otherwise, even i only in his name? Aer all, its Gods Kingdom, whichbrings to mind the prophecy regarding Isas rejection o the many wholl claim to be his disci-

ples on the Day o Doom.39

Tereore, in closing, I must discuss this sensitive matter at the heart o polemics regarding thecore content o the GoB.

Te Birthright to the regency o this Kingdom was lost by Israel, a polity the O describes asGods rstborn son by analogy; i.e., Gods initial historical monotheist polity.40 By the timeo Prophet Isa however, so divorced were Israelites rom Gods Kingdoms, both within and

without, that the emple o God rebuilt by the murderous pretender Herod the Great hadbecome a den o thieves setting precedent or the present Rothschild consortium o global

money-changers and Papal Bankers since the early 19th Century. Te Jewish religious lie was

overseen by what the GoB calls an oligarchy o False Pharisees and dubiously appointed priestswho collectively decided to murder their nal prophet or exposing the charade. Teir acadewas little more than a parody o the authentic prophetic Authority Allah had removed romthem as promised by prophet Hosea in his book, vs:53, and they were blind to the loss due toGods reprobation o their secret societies (Babylonian almudism and Kabalism), as is pres-

ently the case.

Divine guidance and its continuum with the eternal ideal good as identied by mans ability toreason what is immutably right and true (i.e., the moral law or moral imperatives o Islam), has

been exquisitely demonstrated by Kant:

b vtu n pp p ntng t tn t t tpp -xtu t t nuu n t puu nnt v. H u tn t nt t tt pp tttv t t nntn n b p-

v b v n xt n n t gttpv nt nt unt bttn.

- Groundwork for the Metaphisic of Morals, Emmanuel Kant

Knt ntv tt pu n u n t t vt G n nvng t tg ptv, t .41

- Ibrahim Lawson, Headmaster of the independentNottingham Islamia School

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

39 Many will say to me in that day, have we not prophesied and cast out many devils, and in thy name donemany wonderul works? whereupon I will say, depart rom me, thou workers o iniquity! I never knew you.

(Matt 7:22)40 For Example, see Exodus 4:22 And thou shalt say to Pharaoh, Tus saith Jehovah: Israel is my son, my rst-

born. For those interested, I oer a ull dissertation on this thesis in my Book: rinity, op.cit.

41 Usury, Te Root Cause o Injustices in Our ime, Lecture 7, Te Setting, p. 47. Pub. By PAID, P.O. Box 436,Norwich, England, NR3 1LL

35


36/316

Although we cannot touch the pound in a pound o sugar nor the good in a good deed, wedo experience and know what they are. People who argue the point are mischie makers: menwho preer to change the weight o common sense and dispute what is good in order to rob

and/or gainsay, thereby obtaining advantage and power over their ellows. Tis sad act o lie iswhat challenges our courage and marks the true essence o polemics. Te anarchy oen created

by such vacuous reutations however, is not within the metaphysical boundaries set by TeKingdom o God Within us, nor can Gods Kingdom maniest externally under the guidance

o such Pharisees. Fraudulent abstractions such as rinitarianism, legalism, socialism, Keynes-ian capitalism, Jesuitical divine-right monarchism, reductionism, materialism, gilded ritualism

etc., all produce traditional veils that cover Kants metaphysical eye-o-reason or those whoreject the Final Apostle and his sunnah. Such isms create politically correct orums o intimida-

tion and surely gave exceptional cause or the Protestant Reormation.

Returning to the premise and argument implicit in the GoB and N core, Isa did leave the pro-phetic mantle o Elijah with his Ebionite disciples, telling them to do two things as conrmed

by both the N and GoB:

[1] ell all men that the Kingdom o God is at hand, and[2] Wait or the arrival o Paraclete who would instruct them in all truth.

Christians commonly think this Paraclete arrived at the celebrated event o Pentecost, in whichthe so-called Holy Spirit descended on the Apostles and Disciples. But this is not so, or thereis ample evidence that the Primitive Churchincluding its Pentecostal veteransawaited hisarrival long aerwards. Tese two directives are also bound together as were two men seen by

Prophet Isaiah in a vision:

An t t p n, t nk, n t ,42

An tn nt t gt . Tn , A n, L! I tn ntnu nt tt n t t; I v t t pt v ngt. An k, t n t p n! Tn n n , Bbn n, n! An

t v g g H bkn t t gun... HE BURDEN UPON ARABIA.In t t n Ab u g, O u tvng pn Dnt. 43 O nbtnt t n ,44 Bng t t tt; Wt t b t t .

F t t , t n , F t bnt b, n t t . F tu t L t : Wtn , ng t t n, t

g K ; n t n t nub , t gt n t pp K, b n; t LORD G I pkn t.

- Isaiah 2 & 21: Vs: 7-9 & 12-17

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

42 Te word translated as camel or rider has a root meaning burden bearer, reerring to a person not an animalor dromedary. Also, the verse indicates that the riders and their animals were yoked together, which I opine

indicates Prophets Isa and Mohammad. Tere is another Hebrew word, specically or camel, which is not usedin this passage. Te text seems to indicate someone who is given a heavy task. Te verse also reers to a lion as the

rider drawn by camels, who then declares Babylon is allen while breaking the idols to pieces, which is exactlywhat Mohammed did on his triumph in Mecca.

36


37/316

Tis is the verse o Arabias Burden (rom Isaiah 21), and it places the responsibility or TeKingdom o Gods temporal Government upon Arabia as the brethren (i.e. cousins: Hebrew

= ach) o Israel as predicted by Moses.45 Furthermore, the chapter mentions by name the tribesrom Ishmael and Midian46 responsible or ministering to the Prophet and bearing witness to

his (the Lions) symbolic destruction o Babylons Idolatry when he entered Mecca (Kedar)47 in

triumph!

Many o our ellow burden bearers are presently involved with inter-aith dialogues with an en-tity that all O reerences to Babylon represent as a regency inimical to monotheism by virtueo idols, icons and mythical abrications o gilded celebrants toadying to warrior kingso-the-

earth.

Tis is amply represented by the 2000 year old Christian accretion. Nevertheless, the Illuminatibred concept o Humanism has overwhelmed the reason o many Muslims whove orgotten

what great enemies these iconographers really are. When Salaudin met with Richard the Lion-

heart, they met as respected enemies, and it would do well or all to remember the boundariesthat separated these princes or eternity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

43 An Arabian people named in Genesis 10:7 as descended rom Cush; in Genesis 25:3 as descended rom Ketu-rah.

44 A region adjacent to Yathrib (Madina) inhabited by the tribes descended rom ema, o the progeny o Ishmael.45 See Deut 18:15-18 a prophet will I raise up unto them rom among their brethren (ach) like unto thee, and

will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

Note: the word ach, meaning brethren, specically reers to a near relative, i.e. a cousin or ellow brother coun-tryman, whereas the Hebrew reya reers to a close brother or even a husband as brother to his wie, denoting

intimacy. Tereore the prophet spoken o cannot be Isa. Te translators are quite careless with these specics.46 Abrahams descendants via Keturah.

47 Te settlements o Kedar were probably in the Northwest o Arabia, not ar rom the borders o Palestine. As-syrian inscriptions have thrown light upon the history o the tribe. Tere, Kedar is mentioned along with the Ar-abs and Nebaioth, which decides its identity with Kedar o the Old estament, and there is ound also an accounto the conicts between the tribe and King Assurbanipal. O the Ishmaelite tribes, Kedar must have been one othe most important, and thus in later times the name came to be applied to all the wild tribes o the desert. It is

through Kedar (Arabic, keidar) that Muslim genealogists trace the descent o Mohammed rom Ishmael.

37


38/316

As a reminder I post the ollowing passage rom Al-Quran :

An n t t t Mng A, nng t t t, pt t Pp t Bk t t Bk A bn t bk, (t bn -

tng) t nt kn! T t t v n gv ut () gnt t p Sn: t bp , nt Sn, but t v n, tng n Mg, n

u tng n t Bbn t t ng Ht n Mt [ tu gv tntutn n Bbn]. But nt t tugt nn (u tng) tut ng: W n t; nt bp. T n t t n t b-

tn n n . But t u nt tu nn xpt b A pn. An tn t t, nt t pt t. An t kn tt t bu (g)u v n n t ppn t H. An v t p t t u, t but kn! I t kpt t Ft n gu tv v,

btt bn t t L, t but kn! O u Ft! S nt (t tMng) bguu pt, but pt; n tn (t ): t t t-ut Ft gvu punnt. IT IS NEVER THE WISH OF THOSE WITHOUT FAITH

AMONG THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK, NOR OF THE PAGANS, THAT ANYTHING GOOD

SHOULD COME DOWN TO YOU FROM YOUR LORD. But A H pM H A L g bunng.

Srah 2 Al-Baqarah (e Heifer) 101-105

Tis highlighted verse is sucient or my purpose. Were not Ibrahim and our Prophet con-summate iconoclasts who boldly conronted and drew boundaries reuting the idolatry that

now seduces our ummah with tolerance? I posit that the current concept o such lenience is aseditious ideal that permits enemies o Islam an advantage that warriors like Salaudin or Had-

rat Ali would never permit.

38


39/316

With respect to the reality o this enmity that divides Muslims rom Romes pretensions, Ithereore submit the ollowing verses rom the GoB:

Ju : Y v nt n but I v n u, tt b p. I tn t t u, b tu p t t bn v n n v-

nt G [Mnng t Ppt].

- (XVIII)

T n gv n t ngb tt t gt t t t, n t ptu b v n jut pptn. An t , tt t ub t n. But u t n n t v t n gv t t n, pkng v . n, n t ngb t bt t unt t tt g.

- (LXI)

L G, b t pvn pvt tng n t pp I, b nu t tb t t, tu t p t b b t Mng, tu

t t t . Hv n t n n p t Mng, tt Stn,tn n, p. An vng t, Ju t t: S b t, L, gt

n u!

- (LXVII)

Archaic solar-cross cults are what O Prophets called a religion o mixed-doctrine or mixed-wine a truth that cannot be denied except in todays sensitive politically-correct orums. I

posit also that the Mark or Symbol o Cain is most likely the solar cross o the Ancient MysteryReligions as depicted in its Jesuit version (below right).48 Solar Cross icons are distinctively

reverenced by Catholics, Anglicans, a variety o Protestants, Evangelicals, Freemasons, sundryPagans and Occultists, as well as Eastern Orthodox Christians.

Te signicant concept here is that o an enemy, i.e. Satan and his empire, the imperial obses-sion that Jesuits, Rome, Freemasons and Zionists all hold as a common, and unortunately,

ascist bond. Tis act is disturbingly depicted by Picasso in Guernica (see Appendix V) anddeserves a brie diversion so the ongoing polemics attached to the GoB may be placed in a

gestalt perspective that includes the alarming current events o the present world crisis.

39


40/316

J S: IHS ( L)W qN H;O I, H, S.

Te solar-cross icon (top-right) represents sun-god cults globally, and or which many archaicsects practiced ritual human sacrice. Teir priests have always been revered and eared, and

o course, the Catholic Eucharist bespeaks this sacrice openly or the abomination it is, whichprimitively entailed cannibalism, a word derived rom Kahan-baal or priest o Baal. Further-more, there are Gnostic connotations indicating that the communion ritual originally repre-sented spermatophagia or antric Eucharist by the celebrants, and amongst advanced degree

members o the OO, Freemasons, Rosicrucians, Catholic Hierarchy and other Hermeticcovens still does.14 What is represented in the imagery o Picassos work are the several icons as-sociated with this ancient Baal-religion; icons that continue to be reverenced and/or utilized by

various priesthoods or political ascension and hegemony, not the least o which is the covertPapal tyranny under Jesuit direction internationally since the 16th Century. Ignatius Loyola,their revered ounder, was an Illume, i.e. an occult Rosicrucian adept or Allumbrados Initiateand Master o this same Mystery Religion. I include this brie detour because it is much more

than a tangent in light o history and current events, especially since international and inter-re-ligious dialogues and political parties are generally under auspice or inuence o these devotediconographers. Muslim Imams must be made aware o their true colors and question the realpurpose o dialogue when entering their company. I its to keep an enemy close at hand, as

per the counsel o Sun zu in his Art o War, then be advised and all should be well. But i onethinks a Muslim can actually treat with these people or ultimate advantage or altruism, it is a

great oolishness demonstrating not only naivet but also a lack o tru

Gospel of Barnabas - Truth, Lies and Historicity

Documents

Transcript of Gospel of Barnabas - Truth, Lies and Historicity