Iran Discovery Will Collapse Christianity?

Hardly.  A "Gospel of Barnabas," purportedly by one of Jesus' apostles, has surfaced in Iran.  It supposedly predicts Muhammed's coming, which would surpass Jesus.  But here's the only relevant fact - it dates to the 5th or 6th century, and it has no textual history earlier than that to tie it to Jesus' apostle.

All of the so-called gnostic gospels date more than 100 years after Jesus with no earlier textual evidence.  Most date to the 2nd and 3rd century with nothing to tie them to an eyewitness.

There are all kinds of ancient books that people claim are "lost" from Christianity or unfairly excluded.  The key to always look at is the date of the book and if there's anything to tie it to an eyewitness. That's what sets apart the Biblical Gospels and gives them authority.

Once again, keep moving along, folks.  Nothing to look at here.

Comments

[J.M.]

This seems to be similar to the claims that the Bhuddist sacred texts predict Muhammed's coming as well. It should be a sign to all comers when you have to alter sacred texts to make them fit.

[ArthurK]

Is it any clearer than Nostrodamus predicting Hitler (Hister)?

---------

Alleged writings

Tertullian and other Western writers regard Barnabas as the author of the Letter to the Hebrews. This may have been the Roman tradition—which Tertullian usually follows—and in Rome the epistle may have had its first readers. But the tradition has weighty considerations against it[clarification needed].

According to Photius (Quaest. in Amphil., 123), Barnabas wrote the Acts of the Apostles. (Current consensus ascribes the book to the author of Luke.)

He is also traditionally associated with the Epistle of Barnabas, although modern scholars think it more likely that that epistle was written in Alexandria in the 130s. The 5th century Decretum Gelasianum includes a Gospel of Barnabas amongst works condemned as apocryphal; but no certain text or quotation from this work has been identified.

Another book using that same title, the "Gospel of Barnabas", survives in two post-medieval manuscripts in Italian and Spanish.[20] Contrary to the canonical Christian Gospels, and in accordance with the Islamic view of Jesus, this later "Gospel of Barnabas" states that Jesus was not the son of God, but a prophet and messenger. The book also says Jesus rose alive into Heaven without having been crucified and mentions Mohammad by name.[21] Though the exact dating is disputed, it is not regarded as authentic by any scholar.[22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnabas#Alleged_writings
----------------
see also
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

[ArthurK]

The second link list a series on anachronisms that seem to date it in the early 1300s.

[WisdomLover]

Arthur-

The bit about mentioning Mohammad by name is not, by itself, a reason to disqualify the book. Maybe it was a particularly awesome bit of prophecy.

On the other hand, declaring that the crucifixion did not occur disqualifies this so-called gospel. Only crackpots question the historicity of the crucifixion.

[x]

Seems like another attempt by proponents of Islam to legitimize their false religion. We already know that the original writings of Muhammed in the Qu'ran were destroyed and replaced upon the resolution of the Umayyad dynasty solidifying their power in the region to something that better suited their rule. Not that having an original Qu'ran would be much better; still wouldn't make it a legitimate religion. This smacks of trying to rationalize Muhammed as some kind of actual prophet. Seems to be the flavor of the day though; fortunately we were warned in the New Testament about things like this...

[Dave]

What? Another discovery that collapses Christianity. Say it isn't so!

Frankly, there've been so many "discoveries" that collapse Christianity, you'd think we'd be a black hole by now.

[WisdomLover]

Dave-

Christ did say in John 12:32 that He would draw all men to Himself.

Maybe you've just discovered how :-)

[Trent]

Apparently there are two books with the same name. One written naming Muhammed written in the 1300s, and a second one written in the time frame mentioned in the article.

[John]

It's amazing that people would think that something like this could shake our faith in Christianity. So, I guess all the secular historical documents (Josephus et al.) verifying that Jesus was crucified are baseless? Give me a break.

[Billy Sparks]

Romans 3:4
Galatians 1:8
2 Timothy 2:13

Jesus is God. God cannot deny Himself. Why would God send a gospel to contradict previous Revelation? Well, He wouldn't. The best historical source of info pertaining to who God is - The Bible. It's good to know that people can see through the attempts of the enemy to deceive, but some of our brothers and sisters do waiver when faced with what seems like compelling evidence (it's really not all that compelling). We should, I feel, as believers pray for them and remember that the "roaring lion" is always looking to deceive. I'll end with
2 Timothy 2:22-26.