1500 Year Old Bible Claims Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified

LostBoy101

Interesting piece. However the Vacitan will just deny its existence and hide it somewhere so it can be never be found again.

This discovery turns modern Christianity on its head! This bible, dating as far back as 2,000 years, details the Gospel of Barnabas, a disciple of Jesus Christ, which shows that Jesus wasn’t actually crucified and doesn’t claim him to be the son of God, but instead a prophet. The book charges that Apostle Paul was “The Impostor.” The story is completely different. In the Book of Barnabas, Jesus wasn’t crucified, but ascended to heaven alive, and Judas Iscariot was crucified instead.
The National Turk issued a report saying that the bible was seized from smugglers is a Mediterranean operation. The report states the gang was charged with smuggling a variety of things, such as antiques, illegal excavations and even explosives. The book is valued at around $28 million. That’s quite the find!
Experts and Authorities in Tehran insist that the book is authentic. It’s written in gold lettering on loosely tied leather in Aramaic, the language of Christ.
There are connections that can be drawn between this text and Islam, and it directly contradicts the New Testament’s teaching. In it, Jesus also predicts the birth of Prophet Muhammed, who founded Islam 700 years later.
Experts believe that during the Council of Nicea, the Catholic Church went through and hand picked the gospels that form what we know the bible to be today and omitted the Gospel of Barnabas (among others) in favor of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. These original texts surfaced over time, and this new discovery is especially worrying to the Catholic church.
So what does this mean for religions derived of Christianity? It’s a bit of a predicament. The Vatican has asked Turkish authorities to allow them access to the book for examination. The big question is: will they accept it as evidence, deny its validity, or call it a “Muslim lie” as “Truth” Magazine did in 2000?
To many people, this book is seen as a cause for hope. But what does this mean for atheists? Is it a real text or a hoax? And does it even really matter? With any luck, this newly discovered text will force theologians to ask deeper questions about their faiths instead of believing it without thinking. Only time will tell. In the meantime, keep an open mind, be respectful of the beliefs of others, and remember that it’s our responsibility to take care of one another and this place we call home.

Source : http://higherperspective.com/2014/05/1500-year-old-bible.html?utm_source=HP

catallus

Pseudepigrapha, I think is what this is called.

smash

catallus wrote: »

Pseudepigrapha, I think is what this is called.

The bible? No... That's called bullshít.

brummytom

...But what does this mean for atheists? Is it a real text or a hoax? And does it even really matter?

No.

Nodin

Nope.

In February 2012, it was confirmed by the Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism that a 52-page biblical manuscript in Syriac had been deposited in the Ethnography Museum of Ankara.[63] Newspaper reports in Turkey claimed that the manuscript had been found in Cyprus in 2000, in an operation conducted by police against smugglers, and had been kept in a police repository since then;[64] and further speculated that the text of the manuscript could be that of the Gospel of Barnabas. No subsequent confirmation has been made, either as to the contents of the Ankara manuscript, or as to any findings of scientific tests for its age and authenticity.[63] In March 2012 Dr Assad Sauma, an expert in medieval Syriac texts, reported that the manuscript deposited in the Ethonography Museum could be identified with one for which he had formerly undertaken a partial analysis. He stated that the portions of text that he had examined had consisted of random gospel verses and quotations; and also that he had been unable to find any correspondence between them and the text of the Gospel of Barnabas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Barnabas

LostBoy101

catallus wrote: »

Pseudepigrapha, I think is what this is called.

First time I've heard of that to be honest. So it means that they are not recognised by the Church or something along those lines?

Menas

You might be better off posting in the spirituality forum op!

LostBoy101

Trigger Happy wrote: »

You might be better off posting in the spirituality forum op!

Sure I stick it in there and see what they have to say about it.

Nodin

LostBoy101 wrote: »

First time I've heard of that to be honest. So it means that they are not recognised by the Church or something along those lines?

Yeah, they can't just call it "some aul bollocks" in public so they go for fanciness.

RobbieTheRobber

Why would a book such as this make any difference to religious people. (Even if it is real)
From those who accept creationism right up to those who still claim that moses and the exodus is historic fact religious people believe all kinds of stupid crap and that's without even having to bring up the stupid idea of a supposed all powerful God who had to send his son to die.

smurgen

i could never understand how the oldness of these books give them some sort of authority or mystery. for example if someone was to right all this crap now it would be dismissed as crap yet because they're older they're taken as verbatim or somehow truthful.

Talib Fiasco

Oh here we go again....*leaves thread*

JohnMarston

smurgen wrote: »

i could never understand how the oldness of these books give them some sort of authority or mystery. for example if someone was to right all this crap now it would be dismissed as crap yet because they're older they're taken as verbatim or somehow truthful.

Its a book that was written over thousands of years, penned by tens of men of all different backgrounds. Its been preserved since through painstaking transcription by hand, and many have died (often horribly) for owning a copy of it. Obviously there are many who believe in what it says, and have done from the very time it was originally written

Just saying

ScumLord

It wouldn't be a huge shock to find an alternative version of the gospels. Early Christianity was diverse and every group would have had their own version of events. The catholic church tried to go through those gospels and discern which ones worked well together, I wouldn't hold that against the early church. I'm sure there could have been some really crackpot gospels out there and others that were just riding on the coattails of Christianity's success.

Still I think it highlights that the bible was turned into a story everyone could live with and it hasn't avoided editing over those years.

RustyNut

Did someone give me some land?

the_monkey

All fictitious rubbish anyway
Let's start debating the Star Wars mythology while were at it

Iwasfrozen

JohnMarston wrote: »

Its a book that was written over thousands of years, penned by tens of men of all different backgrounds. Its been preserved since through painstaking transcription by hand, and many have died (often horribly) for owning a copy of it. Obviously there are many who believe in what it says, and have done from the very time it was originally written

Just saying

So just like the bible then? Doesn't mean either are accurate.

Maybe Jesus was crucified and maybe not the only accurate source would be the Romans themselves.

LizT

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=91745436
Same thread in Christianity forum, no need for another one here.