Secret £14million Bible in which 'Jesus predicts coming of Prophet Muhammad' unearthed in

[TheLibertarianNationalist]

Secret £14million Bible in which 'Jesus predicts coming of Prophet Muhammad' unearthed in

...unearthed in Turkey

--Vatican 'wants to see' 1,500-year-old ancient script
--Has been hidden by Turkish state for 12 years
--Handwritten in gold-lettered Aramaic

A secret Bible in which Jesus is believed to predict the coming of the Prophet Muhammad to Earth has sparked serious interest from the Vatican.

Pope Benedict XVI is claimed to want to see the 1,500-year-old book, which many say is the Gospel of Barnabas, that has been hidden by the Turkish state for the last 12 years.

The £14million handwritten gold lettered tome, penned in Jesus' native Aramaic language, is said to contain his early teachings and a prediction of the Prophet's coming.

Secret Bible: The 1,500-year-old tome was is said to contain Jesus' early teachings and his prediction of the Prophet's coming

Ancient: The leather-bound text, written on animal hide, was discovered by Turkish police during an anti-smuggling operation in 2000

The leather-bound text, written on animal hide, was discovered by Turkish police during an anti-smuggling operation in 2000.

It was closely guarded until 2010, when it was finally handed over to the Ankara Ethnography Museum, and will soon be put back on public display following a minor restoration.

A photocopy of a single page from the handwritten ancient manuscript is thought to be worth £1.5million.

Turkish culture and tourism minister Ertugrul Gunay said the book could be an authentic version of the Gospel, which was suppressed by the Christian Church for its strong parallels with the Islamic view of Jesus.

He also said the Vatican had made an official request to see the scripture - a controversial text which Muslims claim is an addition to the original gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke and John.

In line with Islamic belief, the Gospel treats Jesus as a human being and not a God.

Serious interest: The Vatican, under Pope Benedict XVI, is said to want to see the recently re-discovered Bible

Historic: The £14million handwritten gold lettered tome is penned in Jesus' native Aramaic language

It rejects the ideas of the Holy Trinity and the Crucifixion and reveals that Jesus predicted the coming of the Prophet Muhammad.

In one version of the gospel, he is said to have told a priest: 'How shall the Messiah be called? Muhammad is his blessed name'.

And in another Jesus denied being the Messiah, claiming that he or she would be Ishmaelite, the term used for an Arab.

Despite the interest in the newly re-discovered book, some believe it is a fake and only dates back to the 16th century.

The oldest copies of the book date back to that time, and are written in Spanish and Italian.

Protestant pastor İhsan Özbek said it was unlikely to be authentic.

This is because St Barnabas lived in the first century and was one of the Apostles of Jesus, in contrast to this version which is said to come from the fifth or sixth century.

He told the Today Zaman newspaper: 'The copy in Ankara might have been written by one of the followers of St Barnabas.

'Since there is around 500 years in between St Barnabas and the writing of the Bible copy, Muslims may be disappointed to see that this copy does not include things they would like to see.

'It might have no relation with the content of the Gospel of Barnabas.'

Theology professor Ömer Faruk Harman said a scientific scan of the bible may be the only way to reveal how old it really is.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...coming-Prophet-Muhammad-unearthed-Turkey.html

 

[Voluntary Man]

Is it just a coincidence that the manuscript's age is the same as Islam's?

No offense intended to our Islamic friends.

 

[carclinic]

So, is this thing carbon dated? We have much older Christian manuscripts that mention nothing about Muhammad. People need to read their history books, how can this even be considered news?

 

[Perry]

All the manuscripts in the bible are there because they are mentioned in other parts of the bible. If there was no biblical reference to a certain manuscript then it was not included in the bible. This is why many of the so-called gospels were left out of our western bible.
Is the Gospel of Barnabas mentioned in scripture?

 

[Harryhaller]

Of course there is still no evidence Jesus existed prior to the fall of Jeruselem. For awhile it seems gospels were all over the place. This was cleaned up by the council of Nicea. Not surprised that more stuff got written later.

 

[Voluntary Man]

Of course there is still no evidence Jesus existed prior to the fall of Jeruselem. For awhile it seems gospels were all over the place. This was cleaned up by the council of Nicea. Not surprised that more stuff got written later.

www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b....dence_for_Jesus_from_NonChristian_Sources.htm

www.infidels.org/library/modern/jeff_lowder/jury/chap5.html

 

[Muwahid]

Is it just a coincidence that the manuscript's age is the same as Islam's?

No offense intended to our Islamic friends.

First Muslims didn't speak Aramaic

And it doesn't, 1,500 years predates Islam

And it was a Christian scholar who told Muhammad (ص) that he was a prophet, in fact all historical accounts show that it was normal that the Christians and Jews were awaiting a new prophet, the church in later years as is common knowledge got rid of many texts.

 

[specsaregood]

I find this fascinating. That Barnabas sounds like a real class act, seems like he deserves a chapter of his own.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barnabas

Named an apostle in Acts 14:14, he and Saint Paul undertook missionary journeys together and defended Gentile converts against a faction promoting Gentile circumcision.

Barnabas curing the poor by Paolo Veronese, Musée des Beaux-Arts de Rouen.

 

[Harryhaller]

Well VM your references written by Christian apologists are what they are. If you could find a real contemporary artifact or reference you would become famous. Anyone believing the Josephus reference, a obvious forgery, attributed to Bishop Eusebius in the forth century, is a hack. Not a single mention of this prior to the forth century by anyone commentating on the writings of Josephus. The Nero reference to Christians did not appear until the fifth century in the writings of Sulpicius Severus. Again more rewriting of history. I've spent over 38 years looking for real references to Jesus at the time he existed and have found none. That is until the early second century. The Dead Sea Scrolls confirm this assertion. Best to all in their search.

 

[BlackTerrel]

Sounds convenient....

 

[Harryhaller]

Same old same old

Sounds convenient....

Projection

 

[Voluntary Man]

1,500 years predates Islam

I assume that 1500 is an approximation. Muhammad was born about 1500 years ago. Jesus hasn't walked the earth for nearly 2000. Given the available evidence, isn't it far more likely the article in question was authored by a contemporary of Muhammad's?

 

[Voluntary Man]

Well VM your references written by Christian apologists are what they are.

If you'd actually READ the links you're responding to, you'd have noticed that the second link is authored by the founder of internet infidels, not a "Christian apologist."

 

[Harryhaller]

Ontogeny of Christianity

If you'd actually READ the links you're responding to, you'd have noticed that the second link is authored by the founder of internet infidels, not a "Christian apologist."

Never read the second, was replying to the first authors notes. It would have been nice if the Essenes had mentioned Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls; buried when the Romans invaded Jerusalem 70 AD. But they did not. It appears then that Christianity came about after the fall of Jerusalem. A combination of Jewish Messianic tradition and the Egyptian Coptic faith. With Jesus being an invention not a real historical person. Unless there is real contemporary historical evidence; of which there is not. Real evidence would be more than just famous. It would be the greatest treasure in history. It is not producible because it simply does not exist. In college I was challenged to produce evidence of a real historical Jesus during a creationism/evolution debate. I was Christian and a Geology major and quite embarrassed when I produced my Bible and found out about its' history.

 

[Voluntary Man]

Never read the second, was replying to the first authors notes. It would have been nice if the Essenes had mentioned Jesus in the Dead Sea Scrolls; buried when the Romans invaded Jerusalem 70 AD. But they did not. It appears then that Christianity came about after the fall of Jerusalem. A combination of Jewish Messianic tradition and the Egyptian Coptic faith. With Jesus being an invention not a real historical person. Unless there is real contemporary historical evidence; of which there is not. Real evidence would be more than just famous. It would be the greatest treasure in history. It is not producible because it simply does not exist. In college I was challenged to produce evidence of a real historical Jesus during a creationism/evolution debate. I was Christian and a Geology major and quite embarrassed when I produced my Bible and found out about its' history.

I don't know why you dragged Jesus into an evolution debate. How does THAT happen?

You know, I used to visit the apologetics website of a scientist who was a former atheist, now a Christian. One of the stories she told on her website was about when she used to get into debates with naive/unprepared Christians: in one particular account -- of which she was quite ashamed -- she managed to persuade a young Christian that "Jesus couldn't have been crucified, because crucifixion wasn't used by the Romans until 70 A.D." [a deliberate lie she used to win the debate]. Apparently, her fake fact was overkill, though, because her young victim was so shaken that he soon converted to atheism. I suspect similar incidents are common (e.g., your own experience).

If you're looking for Jesus' bones, you won't find them. If you're looking for corroborating accounts of existence, they aren't that difficult to find (you've already been provided some). Most honest atheists (like the author of the second article) don't dispute the extra-Biblical evidence (at least, not all of it), and stick strictly to skepticism of the supernatural.

In any event, whatever you choose to believe is your business. Your reasons sound personal. I believe you were duped. But, since I'm not a proselytite, I'll leave it there.

 

[otherone]

Apparently, her fake fact was overkill, though, because her young victim was so shaken that he soon converted to atheism. I suspect similar incidents are common (e.g., your own experience).

That's a very good point. People are willing to believe anything. That would explain why there are over 4200 different faiths in the world.

 

[Voluntary Man]

That's a very good point. People are willing to believe anything. That would explain why there are over 4200 different faiths in the world.

Gullibility explains much and excuses nothing; Global Warming, AIDS, the Bushes, Obama...pick your hoax.

 

[Harryhaller]

VM, You point to a single artifact or single mention of Jesus that dates to the years 0 AD to 33 AD from that time period and I'll concede your point. There are none. You have shown not a one. Everyone says there is lots of evidence. None are credible and all so called evidence is easily debunked. Christianity simply didn't begin until later in the second century.

 

[Voluntary Man]

VM, You point to a single artifact or single mention of Jesus that dates to the years 0 AD to 33 AD from that time period and I'll concede your point. There are none. You have shown not a one. Everyone says there is lots of evidence. None are credible and all so called evidence is easily debunked. Christianity simply didn't begin until later in the second century.

So, basically, what you're saying is that you consider all accounts of Jesus dated post crucifixion as false, and the absence of any surviving/discovered accounts/artifacts dated to a specific 33 year period (2,000 years ago) as evidence he never lived? That's not exactly the accepted historical standard, but suit yourself.

 

[Lishy]

Interesting. The older the artifact, the closer we are to figuring out what the hell happened back then!