CHAPTER V

THE DOCUMENTS AND THEIR HISTORY

The Italian Document

Now let us see whether we can learn anything from the document itself. As mentioned in the prologue, the document is in the Austrian National Library of Vienna (Codex No. 2662). A careful study of the paper on which the Pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas was written shows that it is characterized by a watermark in the shape of an anchor. This type of paper is Italian and dates from the second half of the 16th century. The style of writing is also typical of the same date. In their preface the Raggs compared it to certain Venetian manuscripts written between 1543 and 1567. “The most exact parallel ... is a document (in the Archives of St. Mark’s, Venice) which bears the signature, Franco Vianello, Segretario Ducale, and the date, April 15, 1584.”¹ All scholars from the Raggs until now have been agreed that this Italian copy of the Gospel of Barnabas was made sometime after 1550, perhaps around 1600.

History of its Transmission (Isnad) Since 1709

When Muslims wish to verify a tradition of the Prophet Muhammad or some other historical document they search for a record of the chain of witnesses through whom the tradition or document was transmitted. In Arabic this is called the isnad (الإسْناد). The isnad of this Italian copy begins in Holland in 1709 when it was borrowed by Mr. John Toland from Mr. J. F. Cramer of Amsterdam. Mr. Toland, the first person to speak or write publicly about the Gospel of Barnabas, called it a “forgery”, a lie. In a book entitled An Historical Account of the Life and Writings of the Late Eminently Famous Mr. John Toland, published in 1722, he is quoted as saying,

And in another article Toland writes, “I missed no opportunity of detecting the forgery.”³ In 1713 the manuscript was given to Prince Eugene of Savoy, and in 1738 it was donated to the Imperial Library (now the Austrian National Library) in Vienna where it is presently filed.

The Spanish Document

History of its Transmission (Isnad) Since 1734

George Sale described a Spanish copy of the Gospel of Barnabas in the preface of his English translation of the Qur’an.⁴ He saw this in 1734 and gives three quotations including the Spanish text, which are in complete agreement with the Italian copy. No more was heard of this Spanish version until another student and lover of books, Mr. J. E. Fletcher, recently found a partial copy of the manuscript described by Sale. This copy, made in the 18th century, is in the Fisher Library of the University of Sydney in Australia, and it comes complete with an isnad connecting it to George Sale.⁵ Written inside the front cover are the following words:

But since this is a copy made by an Englishman between the death of Sale in 1736 and the death of Nickolls in 1745, we can learn nothing from the type of paper or the type of handwriting.

The Lack of any Isnad Before 1634

The earliest mention of the Gospel of Barnabas found to date is in a letter written by a Tunisian Morisco in Spanish. This letter, presently in the National Library of Madrid as No. 9653, was written in 1634 by Ibrahim al-Taybili (in Spanish Juan Perez).⁷ After a long paragraph stating that Muhammad is mentioned in the Torah and the Gospel, but that the church will not let people read them, he continues,

In a second letter from the National Library of Madrid, written at about the same time by a man named Bejarano (in Arabic Ahmad al-Hagari), both al-Taybili and Mustafa de Aranda of Istanbul, are mentioned.⁸ De Aranda is the very man mentioned by Sale as the translator of the Spanish copy of Barnabas which he saw in 1734.⁹ In other words the first mention of the Gospel of Barnabas, and the name of a translator are both mentioned at the beginning of the 17th century – just after the probable time of writing of the Italian copy in our possession. Before this there is complete silence.

Some Muslims would not agree that there is complete silence, for they believe a “Gospel of Barnabas” mentioned in the Gelasian Decrees to be the very pseudo-Gospel which we have been studying. J. Slomp discusses this in his article “The Gospel in Dispute”. He writes,

In other words there is no mention of the content of the Gospel. There is no way to show that it is (or is not) the same as the manuscript in Vienna.

Here I must point out something very important. It must not be supposed that because a work was declared apocryphal by the church that therefore it agrees with the doctrines of Islam. This is simply not the case. There was a Gospel of Peter which claimed clearly that Jesus is the Divine Word of God and died on the cross for our sins. The reason that the church rejected it was because, first of all, it was not written by Peter, and secondly it denied Jesus’ true humanity saying that when he was on the cross he felt no pain.¹¹ There was an Acts of Paul which agrees completely with the Christian doctrine of Jesus’ death for our sins, but says that “you shall have no part in the resurrection unless you remain chaste and defile not the flesh”, which meant no sexual intercourse even for married people. The church rejected it because this is against Christian teaching as it is also against Qur’anic teaching; and also because a presbyter (church leader) of Asia admitted writing it out of his love for Paul. In other words it was a complete forgery, so he was removed from his office in the church for this lie.¹²

Finally, I will mention the Epistle of Barnabas which is a work which was so highly respected by many second and third century Christians that it was even written with one early copy of the Bible.¹³ The teaching which it contains about Christ is correct, but it was declared apocryphal. Why? First, there was no proof that it was written by Barnabas and secondly it attributes the Law of Moses to the wiles of a demon,¹⁴ a statement which contradicts Jesus’ words and which contradicts the Qur’an too.

Muslims have had the same problem with hadith, many of which have been declared “weak”. When a hadith is declared weak, it is being stated that “there is no evidence that such and such was actually said by Muhammad or one of the original companions”. The doctrine in it might be correct, but its authenticity or veracity as to the source is doubted. This is exactly what Christians mean when they use the words “apocryphal” or “uncanonical”.

Now to return again to the lack of an isnad, Jomier says,

The truth of Jomier’s statement is all the more compelling when we realize that according to the Gospel of Barnabas, the teaching that Judas was placed on the cross instead of Jesus, was not a secret teaching revealed only to Barnabas. It was taught to a number of people. In Chapter 219 we read,

In Chapter 221, still in the presence of the above witnesses it says,

Now if we put this information all together we have the following people who are supposed to know that Judas was substituted for Jesus.

Now I will ask you, my readers, this question: Can you really believe that not one of these people ever told what he knew? Especially when some of them had heard Jesus tell Barnabas to write? Would they not have wanted to console others who loved Jesus, just as they had been consoled? In Chapter 221, quoted above, are they not, in fact, ordered to tell the faithful so that “the faithful may be undeceived” concerning Jesus’ death?

All I can answer is that I do not believe that every one of these sixty-six key people who had known Jesus personally, seen his miracles, heard his teaching, and loved Jesus very much would have disobeyed his direct order. Can Muslim readers really believe this? If they do, they are believing something which even the Qur’an contradicts. In the Sura Al Saff (The Battle Array) 61:14 from 3 AH we read:

Surely when Jesus’ disciples said, “We are God’s helpers!” the Qur’an does not mean to say that they all kept quiet and disobeyed what Jesus commanded them to do. We can only conclude that there is no isnad before 1634 AD because this pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas had not yet been written.

Summary

1. The development of Christian doctrine which indicates a date between the 14th and the 16th century;
2. 1634 AD as the date when the document was first mentioned as a prophecy of Muhammad;
3. The lack of any isnad before 1634 AD;
4. The paper, ink, and handwriting of the Italian copy dating it between 1550 to 1600 AD;

all lead to the end of the 16th century as the probable date of writing of this pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas. It is even possible that either the Spanish copy seen by Sale, or the Italian document in Vienna, is the original and the other a translation.

The Arabic Notes

There is, in my opinion, one last thing to be learned from the Italian copy; and that concerns the Arabic notes which have been written in the margins and sometimes in the text. These notes, which are in a different ink, have been mentioned by previous authors and it has been suggested that they were written by someone to whom Arabic is a foreign language. The errors in the Arabic certainly support this idea. Spelling the words “they prepare” as (يحظروا) instead of (يحضروا) in Chapter 42,¹⁶ and “our Creator” as (خلق نا) instead of (خالقنا) in Chapter 206 ¹⁷ represent the type of mistakes which a person would make who was weak in Arabic.

More important than that, however, is the fact that these marginal comments in Arabic seem to be suggested changes for the overlined words in the Italian text, as though this was a working copy, or a rough draft, perhaps in preparation for a translation into Arabic. In some cases these notes are even written upside down as can be seen in Figure 6.

Some notes are suggestions for chapter titles. They are even called Suras, the word used for a chapter in the Qur’an. The name suggested for Chapter 40 is “The Sura of the Deprivation of Adam.” Chapter 41 is to be called “The Sura of the Punishment of Adam and Eve and of the Serpent and Satan.” Chapter 42 is called “The Sura of the Good News.” One of these suggestions can be seen very clearly in Figure 7 where the writer of the Arabic notes proposes “The Sura of Ahmad Muhammad, the Prophet of God” (سورة أحمد مُحمد رسول اللهِ) as the title for Chapter 44.

Other notes are proposals which make the style more like the Qur’an or make the text conform to Muslim theology.

In Chapter 42 where the text has, “Then said Jesus: ‘I am a voice that cries through all Judea, and cries: “Prepare ye the way for the messenger of God, even as it is written in Isaias,’” the Arabic note suggests, “Jesus said, ‘I am a voice that cries that they prepare the way of the Apostle of God, for he shall come.’”¹⁸ This suggestion by the Arabic writer to change “il nontio di dio” (the messenger of God) by putting in “رسول الله” (the apostle of God) is found all through Barnabas. It can be seen five times in the four original photographs reproduced in this book, and in one case (Figure 8) it is even written in the body of the text. Why should the writer of these Arabic suggestions be so keen about this change that he has insisted on it, literally hundreds of times, throughout the manuscript; especially since “nontio” means messenger in Italian and “رسول” means messenger in Arabic?

The Arabic writer wants to use “apostle”, which would be apostolo in Italian, because this title has much more meaning and honor in Muslim theology. An apostle is someone who, by revelation, has received a book from God for his people, and in the case of Muhammad and Jesus, “a book for the worlds”. The very first sentence of the Gospel of Barnabas starts with the phrase “Barnaba apostolo di iessu nazareno” (Barnabas, apostle of Jesus the Nazarene). If Barnabas is an “apostle”, it was absolutely necessary in the mind of the writer of the notes to show that Muhammad was also an “apostle” and not just a “messenger”.

Looking again at the photograph in Figure 7, the overlined words at the beginning of Chapter 44 read, “Jesus answered with a groan: ‘It is so written but Moses wrote it not, nor Joshua, but rather our rabbins (rabbis) who fear not God.’” The writer of the Arabic notes has written, “The Jews change words from their places and afterwards the Christians in the same way change in the Gospel.” Now this Arabic phrase is a standard way of talking about the Bible among Muslims. It has been repeated to me personally many times. All of my readers who are familiar with the Qur’an will realize that the first half of the phrase, “The Jews change words from their places” (اليهود يحرّفون الكلم من بعد مواضعه), is right out of the Sura Al-Ma’ida (The Table) 5:44 where this very accusation is made against them. It agrees with Jesus’ complaint against the rabbins and could be considered a logical association. But what shall we say of the second half of the phrase which reads, “and afterward the Christians in the same way change in the Gospel” (وبعده النصارى كذلكَ يحرفون في الإنجيل)? How could a Muslim write this on a book which he believed to be the true Gospel from the first century?

Three things are therefore obvious from this. The first is that in order to include a quotation from the Qur’an these Arabic notes had to be added by a Muslim after the beginning of Islam. A true 1st century Barnabas would neither speak nor write Arabic. Secondly he certainly would not say that the Christians had already changed a Gospel which he had not yet finished writing. The third thing is that the Muslim adding these notes knew that it was not the true Gospel. If a Muslim found a book foretelling the coming of Muhammad, a book which he thought might be the authentic Gospel, he would certainly not write in the margin that the Christians had changed the Gospel. In addition he would not dare suggest ways to improve God’s Word, and he would be afraid to write in the book at all.

During more than 25 years of conversations about the Canonical Gospel no Muslim has been willing even to mark a verse with a dot to remind himself about where he wanted to ask me a question. This may be because of the order given by Omar, the second Caliph, that no marginal notes were to be written in the Qur’an. If no Muslim will mark the Christian Canonical Gospel, which he believes may have been at least partly changed, how can we believe that he would write upside down notes in the margin of a book which he believed to be completely true and from God. This would be to him a desecration of God’s holy Word and unthinkable. It is such a strong emotional reason that it can almost stand completely by itself without the preceding intellectual arguments. Therefore, I repeat it again. No Muslim would ever write these notes on a document that he believed to be the Holy Word of God. These notes were written by a man who knew that this was not the true Gospel. The Arabic writer and the Italian writer were making a forgery just as John Toland said in 1709 AD.

Conclusion

We can only conclude that the Gospel of Barnabas has no value as a historical document of the first century AD.

Fig. 6: Page no 134r of Codex No. 2662 from the Austrian National Library in Vienna. Gospel of Barnabas, Chapter 125.

Photographs used by permission of Prof. Dr. Otto Mazal, Director, Österreichische Nationalbibliothek, Vienna, Austria.

Notes Concerning Figure 6

The reproduction on the opposite page¹⁹ shows page 134r of the Italian copy of the pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas in the Austrian National Library. In many English copies of the Gospel of Barnabas you can see this very page reproduced, but the Arabic notes have been omitted. Perhaps because if the reader saw them he would suspect that it was a false Gospel. At the top of the writing can be seen the Arabic page no 132 (۱۳۲). See pages no 286 to 289 in the original 1907 edition of the Raggs.

1.   The writer of the Arabic notes has used overlining to draw attention to words or phrases instead of underlining as we use. The first overlined words beginning in the second line read: “date quello che auete del milgiore per ammore di dio. Ditemi uollete uoi riceuere chossa ueruna da dio chativa no certo ho poluere he cenere.” Which means: “Give of the best of that which ye have, for love of God. ‘Tell me, desire ye to receive of God anything that is bad? Certainly not, O dust and ashes!’”

The Arabic suggestion at the top of the right margin is: إذا أرديتم من الله شيئاً ارديتم بخير الاشياء فإذ فعلتم عمل الصدقة اعملوا الصدقة من الخير منه which means: “If you desire anything from God, you desire the best of things. If you do a work of almsgiving, give alms of what is good.”

2.   The second group of overlined words starting at the end of line 5 reads: “chome hauete fede in uoi se darete chossa ueruna chatiua per ammore de dio.”

Or: “How have ye faith in you if ye shall give anything bad for love of God?”

The second Arabic suggestion (or question) in the right margin reads: من أي دين عنده ينبض أن يصدق الخبائس منه

Or: “According to what religion would it be commanded to give alms of what is vile?”

3.   The third overlined passage beginning at line ten reads: “ma dando chossa trissta he seruando per uoi milgiore quella sera la scusa.”

Or: “But in giving a worthless thing, and keeping the best for yourselves, what shall be the excuse’?”

The Arabic in the left margin suggests: إذا اعطيتم الله تعالى من الخبائس ما قلتم عند الله تعالى منه

Or: “If you give unto God most high of what is vile, what can you say before God therewith?”

Fig. 7: Page no 46r of Codex No. 2662 from the Austrian National Library in Vienna. Gospel of Barnabas, the end of Chapter 43 and the beginning of Chapter 44.

Notes Concerning Figure 7

The reproduction on the opposite page shows page 46r of the Italian copy of the pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas in the Austrian National Library. At the top of the writing can be seen the Arabic page no 44 (٤٤). See pages no 102 and 103 in the original 1907 edition of the Raggs.

1.   The Italian writing end of line 2, beginning of line 3; and end of line 10; beginning of line 11 reads: “il nontio di dio”, or “the messenger of God”.

The Arabic notes in the left margin suggest: “رسول الله” or “the apostle of God”. See the text for the explanation of this very common correction.

2.   The Italian in the middle of line 6 reads: “ha deto dio al mio signore”, or “saying thus, God said to my Lord.”

The Arabic note in the left margin reads: “رسول”, or “apostle”. The Arabic writer does not feel that it is appropriate to apply the title “Lord” to Muhammad and suggests changing this to “apostle”.

3.   The Arabic in the right margin opposite the space between chapters reads: “ هذا سورة أحمد محمد رسول الله ” Or: “This is the Sura (chapter) of Ahmad Muhammad, the Apostle of God.”

4.   In the Italian of lines 16-18 the overlined words read: “iessu con gemito elgie scrito chosi ma pero non la scrito mosse ne iosue ma sibene li rabini nostri che non temono dio.”

Or: “Jesus answered with a groan: ‘It is written, but Moses wrote it not, nor Joshua, but rather our rabbins, who fear not God.’”

The Arabic comment in the left margin in relation to this reads:

" اليهود يحرفون الكلم من بعد مواضعه وبعده النصارى كذلك يحرفون في الإنجيل "

Or: “The Jews change words from their places and afterwards the Christians in the same way change in the Gospel.”

Fig. 8: Page no 213r of Codex No. 2662 from the Austrian National Library in Vienna. Gospel of Barnabas, the end of Chapter 205 and the beginning of Chapter 206.

Notes Concerning Figure 8

The reproduction on the opposite page shows page 213r of the Italian copy of the pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas in the Austrian National Library. At the top of the writing can be seen the Arabic page no 212 (۲۱۲). See pages no 454 and 455 in the original 1907 edition of the Raggs.

1.   The first Arabic word in the left margin is “رسول” or “Apostle”. It may be a correction for “mesia” or “messiah” at the end of line ten in the Italian text, but this is not at all sure as there are other places where he makes no attempt to alter the word.

2.   The Italian lines 14 to 16 with the overlined words underlined reads as follows: “-to nel libro di moisse he uerissimo imperoche dio chreatore nosstro he sollo. he io son seruo di dio he dessidero di seruire al nontio di dio il qualle chiamate messia. Dis-” Which means: “Written in the book of Moses is true, inasmuch as God our Creator is alone, and I am God’s servant and desire to serve the messenger of God whom ye call Messiah.”

Both margins carry suggestions as to how this should be written. The right margin says: “قال عيسى الله خلق نا (خلقنا) أحد وأنا عبده وأريد أن أخدم رسوله منه”.  Which means: “Jesus said, ‘God our Creator is one, and I am his slave and wish to serve his apostle.’”

The left margin says:

الله خالق
”قال عيسى اللهُ أحد وأنا عبد منه“

Which means:

God is Creator.
“Jesus said, ‘God is One and I am the slave of God.’”

3.   In the body of the text, above the words “al nontio di dio” of line 16, which mean “the messenger of God”, are written in Arabic: “رسول الله” or “the apostle of God”.

See the text for comments on the importance of this change and the fact that it is written in the body of the text.

4.   Note: This page has two passages about the “messiah”. In no. 2 above Jesus was made to say that he wished “to serve the messenger of God (Muhammad) whom ye call messiah”. In lines 8 to 10 the Italian reads: “pontifice dicendo. di a me ho iessu sci tu smentichato di quanto chonffesato hai che tu non sei dio ne fiollo di dio ne tampoco il mesia. Risspose iessu. certo no.”

Or: “The high priest drew near, saying: ‘Tell me, O Jesus, hast thou forgotten all that thou didst confess, that thou art not god, nor son of god, nor even the messiah?’ Jesus answered, ‘Certainly not.’”

These words make Jesus say that he is not the messiah. See Chapter I.

Fig. 9: Page no 44r of Codex No. 2662 from the Austrian National Library in Vienna. Gospel of Barnabas, Chapter 42.

Notes Concerning Figure 9

The reproduction on the opposite page shows page 44r of the Italian copy of the pseudo-Gospel of Barnabas in the Austrian National Library. At the top of the writing can be seen the Arabic page no 42 (٤٢). This is represented by pages no 96 to 99 in the original 1907 edition of the Raggs.

1.   Line 3 reads, “io no son il messia”, or “I am not the messiah”.

2.   The overlined words in lines 7 to 9 of the Italian manuscript read: “Disse allora iessu io son una uoce che chrida per tutta iudea che chrida. Aparechiate la uia al nontio di dio.”

Or: “Then said Jesus: I am a voice that cries through all Judea, and cries: Prepare ye the way for the messenger of God.”

The Arabic suggestion in the upper right margin reads: “سألوا بني إسرائل بعيسى من أنت قال عيسى أنا صوت أنادي أن يحظروا طريق رسول الله ”

Or: “The children of Israel asked Jesus, ‘who are you?’ Jesus said, I am a voice that cries that they prepare the way of the Apostle of God, for he shall come.’” (يحضروا)

3.   End of line 9, beginning of line 10; and beginning of line 17 read: “al nontio di dio”. or: “the messenger of God”. The Arabic reads: “رسول الله” or “the apostle of God”.

4.   The overlined words in lines 15 to 17 read: “Risspose iessu ... perche io no son degno di sciolgere li leggami delle chalice houero le choregie delle scarpe del nontio di dio quale chiamate messia. il quale he fato auanti di me he uenira dapoi di me he portera le parolle di uerrita onde la fede sua non hauera fine.”

Or: “Jesus answered, ‘... for, I am not worthy to unloose the ties of the hosen or the latchets of the shoes of the messenger of God whom ye call messiah,²⁰ who was made before me, and shall come after me²¹ and shall bring the words of truth, so that his faith shall have no end.’”

The Arabic suggestion reads: قال عيسى لا ينبغي لي أن يخدم نعلين رُسول الله لأنه خلق من قبلي وسيجيء من بعدي ودينه باق أبداً، منه

Or: “Jesus said, ‘It is not fitting for me that he (? I) should be a servant to (sic) the shoes of the apostle of God, for he was created before me and shall come after me, and his religion will remain forever.’”