top of page
Search
Writer's pictureEdward D. Andrews
Sep 68 min read

How Do We Understand the Gospel of Barnabas in Light of Christian Apologetics?

The Gospel of Barnabas is a significant point of contention between Christian and Muslim apologetics, primarily because it contradicts key teachings found in the New Testament regarding Jesus Christ's identity, death, and mission. Muslims often cite this apocryphal gospel as a defense of their teachings, asserting that it offers a more accurate portrayal of Jesus than the canonical Gospels. This article will exhaustively explore the origins, content, and authenticity of the Gospel of Barnabas and why it cannot be considered a legitimate source for understanding the life of Jesus.



The Historical and Religious Context of the Gospel of Barnabas


The Gospel of Barnabas is not an ancient gospel written during the time of Christ, nor does it hold any historical weight in early Christianity. Rather, it is a document that emerged much later, likely in the medieval period, with its earliest known manuscripts dating to the 15th and 16th centuries. Unlike the canonical Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John), which were written by eyewitnesses or close associates of Jesus within the first century, the Gospel of Barnabas lacks the historical credibility that would grant it any authority.


Muslim apologists claim that this document was once accepted as part of the Christian canon but was later suppressed. For example, Muhammad Ata ur-Rahim asserts, “The Gospel of Barnabas is the only known surviving Gospel written by a disciple of Jesus.… [It] was accepted as a Canonical Gospel in the churches of Alexandria up until 325 C.E.” However, no credible historical or textual evidence supports this claim. In fact, no church fathers or early Christian writers ever mention the Gospel of Barnabas in their writings, and it is entirely absent from early Christian debates, councils, and creeds. Even the earliest reference to the document, the Decretum Gelasianum (5th century), does not offer solid evidence that this gospel was ever in circulation during the formative centuries of the church.



The Contradictory Nature of the Gospel of Barnabas with Canonical Scripture


One of the most striking aspects of the Gospel of Barnabas is how thoroughly it contradicts the established and authoritative New Testament Gospels. These contradictions not only make the Gospel of Barnabas incompatible with Christian teaching but also demonstrate its lack of authenticity as a reliable source for understanding the life and work of Jesus Christ.


The Gospel of Barnabas asserts that Jesus did not die on the cross, a belief that aligns with the Islamic account found in Sura 4:157 of the Qur'an, which claims that Jesus was not crucified, but that someone else was substituted in his place. In contrast, the New Testament is clear and consistent on the crucifixion of Christ. The apostle Paul writes in 1 Corinthians 15:3-4: “For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures.” This teaching is the foundation of the Christian faith and is affirmed by the Gospel accounts (Matthew 27:32-56, Mark 15:21-41, Luke 23:26-49, John 19:16-37).


Furthermore, the Gospel of Barnabas contains many theological positions that directly contradict the teachings of both Christianity and Islam. For instance, it claims that Jesus denied being the Messiah, stating, “I am not the Messiah.… I am indeed sent to the house of Israel as a prophet of salvation; but after me shall come the Messiah” (sections 42, 48). This teaching is refuted both by the New Testament and the Qur'an. The New Testament affirms that Jesus is the Messiah, as declared in John 4:25-26, where Jesus tells the Samaritan woman, “I who speak to you am he,” after she speaks of the coming of the Messiah. Similarly, the Qur'an, although denying Jesus' divinity, refers to Him as the "Messiah" (Sura 5:19, 75), making the Gospel of Barnabas inconsistent with both faith traditions.



The Problem of Anachronisms in the Gospel of Barnabas


The issue of anachronisms—historical inaccuracies that place events, customs, or technologies in the wrong time period—is a significant problem when examining the Gospel of Barnabas. Several clear examples of anachronisms show that the document could not have been written in the first century, and instead, it reflects the socio-cultural milieu of medieval Europe.


One glaring example is the reference to the "Year of Jubilee" being observed every 100 years, rather than every 50 years as stated in the Mosaic Law (Leviticus 25:8-10). This change was instituted by Pope Boniface VIII in 1343 C.E., centuries after the time of Christ. The fact that this detail appears in the Gospel of Barnabas indicates that it was written after this papal decree, clearly placing the document in the medieval period.


Furthermore, there are numerous references to feudal customs that were prevalent in medieval Europe but were entirely foreign to the first-century Jewish context in which Jesus lived. For example, the Gospel of Barnabas describes a vassal owing part of his crop to his lord, a practice that reflects medieval feudalism rather than first-century Palestinian agriculture.


Another anachronism is the mention of wooden wine casks, which were not used in first-century Palestine, where wine was stored in wineskins. Jesus Himself referenced this custom in Matthew 9:17 when He said, “Neither is new wine put into old wineskins. If it is, the skins burst and the wine is spilled, and the skins are destroyed. But new wine is put into fresh wineskins, and so both are preserved.” The use of wooden casks did not become common in the Mediterranean world until much later, providing further evidence that the Gospel of Barnabas was not written in the first century.



The Question of Islamic Influence on the Gospel of Barnabas


The Gospel of Barnabas bears significant traces of Islamic influence, indicating that it was likely composed by a Muslim writer, or at least someone sympathetic to Islamic beliefs. J. Jomier, in his study of the text, identified at least fourteen elements in the gospel that are distinctly Islamic in nature. For example, the gospel presents Jesus as a prophet to Israel but claims that Muhammad is the final prophet, sent for the salvation of the whole world. This mirrors the Islamic belief that Muhammad is the "seal of the prophets" (Sura 33:40).


Moreover, the structure of Jesus' sermons in the Gospel of Barnabas closely follows the pattern of a Muslim hutba (sermon), which typically begins with the praise of Allah and His Prophet Muhammad. Such features indicate that the author of this gospel was influenced by Islamic traditions, further discrediting the claim that it is an authentic first-century document written by a disciple of Jesus.



The Absence of Manuscript Evidence and the Claims of Suppression


One of the most telling indications that the Gospel of Barnabas is a forgery is the complete absence of any manuscript evidence predating the 15th century. Unlike the New Testament, which is supported by over 5,898 Greek manuscripts and thousands more in Latin, Syriac, and other ancient languages, the Gospel of Barnabas has no textual tradition to speak of. There are no early copies or fragments, and no references to the gospel by early Christian writers or councils.


Muslim apologists often claim that the Gospel of Barnabas was suppressed by the church and lost for centuries. However, there is no historical evidence to support this claim. As Norman Geisler points out, “Had this gospel even been in existence, authentic or not, certainly it would have been cited by someone.” Early church writers were thorough in their citations of Scripture, and they often quoted or refuted heretical writings. The fact that the Gospel of Barnabas is never mentioned, either positively or negatively, by any early Christian writer strongly suggests that it did not exist during the first 1,500 years of church history.



Textual Corruption and Theological Fabrication in the Gospel of Barnabas


The Gospel of Barnabas contains numerous theological and doctrinal inconsistencies, further revealing it to be a later fabrication rather than an authentic apostolic writing. In particular, its portrayal of Jesus denying His messianic identity is completely at odds with both the New Testament and the Qur'an, as mentioned earlier.


The gospel also introduces fabricated elements that are entirely foreign to the teachings of Jesus and the early church. For example, it claims that Judas Iscariot was crucified in Jesus' place, a theory that has no basis in the New Testament or any early Christian writings. This idea seems to have been inspired by a desire to reconcile the Islamic belief that Jesus did not die on the cross with the Christian narrative of the crucifixion. However, such a claim has no historical or theological support.


In contrast, the New Testament documents provide a consistent and coherent account of Jesus' life, death, and resurrection based on the testimony of eyewitnesses. As the apostle Peter declared in 2 Peter 1:16, “For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.” The eyewitness testimony of the apostles and early disciples forms the foundation of the Christian faith, and their writings have been meticulously preserved through centuries of careful copying and transmission.



Conclusion on the Gospel of Barnabas in Light of Scripture


While the Gospel of Barnabas may serve as a popular tool for Muslim apologetics, its authenticity and reliability as a historical document are thoroughly discredited by its late date, anachronisms, theological inconsistencies, and lack of manuscript evidence. The New Testament, on the other hand, is supported by a vast array of manuscript evidence and was written by eyewitnesses or those who had direct contact with the apostles. As such, it provides the most reliable and authoritative account of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.


In John 14:6, Jesus declared, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” This message of salvation through Jesus Christ alone is the foundation of the Christian faith, and it stands in stark contrast to the message of the Gospel of Barnabas. Those who seek the truth about Jesus must turn to the reliable testimony of Scripture rather than to a late medieval forgery that seeks to distort His true identity and mission.


About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220 books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).


RECOMMENDED READING


20 views0 comments

Comments

bottom of page