Skip to comments.Mohammed in the "Gospel" of Barnabas - ZOT for the Theologians
Posted on 07/17/2006 9:05:28 AM PDT by parakletos
The GREAT PROPHET MOHAMMED was mentioned by name in the forgotten gospel of Barnabas,who was one of the disciples of THE GREAT PROPHET JESUS CHRIST.
The gospel is here: www.barnabas.net/
in the aforementioned site,make a search for the word "mohammed".
heres a sample: from part 97
Then said the priest: `How shall the Messiah be called, and what sign shall reveal his coming?'
Jesus answered: `The name of the Messiah is admirable, for God himself gave him the name when he had created his soul, and placed it in a celestial splendour. God said: "Wait Mohammed; for thy sake I will to create paradise, the world, and a great multitude of creatures, whereof I make thee a present, insomuch that whoso bless thee shall be blessed, and whoso shall curse thee shall be accursed. When I shall send thee into the world I shall send thee as my messenger of salvation, and thy word shall be true, insomuch that heaven and earth shall fail, but thy faith shall never fail." Mohammed is his blessed name.'
Then the crowd lifted up their voices, saying: `O God, send us thy messenger: O Mohammed, come quickly for the salvation of the world!'
what do you think?
In before the Holy Zot.
Too dumb for a zot. Just flush ya down the toilet like a dead guppy.
Except when God changes his mind.
Hint: try googling Gospel of Barnabas.
Please hit the piñata and not each other.
I think mohammed was a pedophile, a liar, a distorter of the truth, a messenger of Satan, and a tool of demons. The worst aspect of the mohammedan religion is that it contains a few bits of Truth; just enough to fool people into believing it.
A half truth is worse than a whole lie.
Hey, a religion Zot! Maybe it can be the August Undead Thread.
Thanks for the ping! That would be something new...
Wasn't that really in the "Gospel of Barabbas"? ;)
The Gospel of Barnabas is a work purporting to be a depiction of the life of Jesus by his disciple Barnabas. The two earliest known manuscripts have been dated to the late sixteenth century, and are written respectively in Italian and in Spanish; although the Spanish version survives now only in an eighteenth century copy. It is about the same length as the four canonical gospels put together (the Italian manuscript has 222 chapters); with the bulk being devoted to an account of Jesus' ministry, much of it harmonised from accounts also found in the canonical gospels. In some, but not all, respects it conforms to the Islamic interpretation of Christian origins; and consequently its authorship and textual history remain the subject of continued controversy.
The Gospel is considered by the majority of academics (including Christians and some Muslims) to be late, pseudepigraphical and a pious fraud; however, some academics suggest that it may contain some remnants of an earlier apocryphal work edited to conform to Islam, perhaps Gnostic (Cirillo, Ragg) or Ebionite (Pines) or Diatessaronic (Joosten), and some Muslim scholars consider it genuine. Some Islamic organizations cite it in support of the Islamic view of Jesus; Islamic views are treated below.
What do I think? Pretty feeble.
Piasa:2:14: And Lo! In the East a wailing of a thousand tongues shall rise to greet the downfall of the false prophet Mohammed, for those he decieved also fall, and with him will dwell in the pit from which there is no return, to be eternally molested by swine bearing the likeness of Helen Thomas.
"At the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those that are in Heaven, on earth, and under the earth: He humbled Himself, becoming obedient unto death, even to the death of the cross. And that every tongue should confess that the Lord Jesus Christ is in the glory of God the Father."
On the last day, ALL knees shall bend before the Glory of the Coming of the King of Universe and Master of all Creation, Jesus.
"In before the Holy Zot."
Can we have a countdown for the Holy Handgrenade?
Thou shalt count to the number 3 and no other. Thou shalt not count to 2 unless thou proceedeth straightaway to 3. Thou shalt not continue to 4. 5 is right out.
LOL!.... "lobbest thou thy Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who, being naughty in My sight, shall snuff it.'"
For those not familiar:
The Gospel of Barnabas is falsely equated in the zotted post with the Epistle of Barnabas, and hence steals the marginal credit given to that Epistle. This is not an error, but a deceit, for no-one can seriously confuse the two. The Epistle was widely accepted in certain regions of the Church which had also accepted, more strongly, the letters of Paul and Acts. Yet the pseudo-Gospel starts off with a long discourse on how the Church has been dominated by Satan in that it has preached such things as a renunciation of circumcision.
This is no mere apparent quabble like Paul's emphasis on faith vs. James' emphasis on works: "...many, being deceived of Satan, under presence of piety, are preaching most impious doctrine, calling Jesus son of God, repudiating the circumcision ordained of God for ever, and permitting every unclean meat: among whom also Paul hath been deceived..." What deranged lunatic could possible treat both this statement and Paul's corpus and Acts as being truthful?
The Satanic Diatribe of the Pig-spawned of the Black Prophet, known as the Gospel of Barnabas, was by every wording plainly a late-medieval text, an obscene forgery by the Moors and Turks waging war against Christianity, seeking to sew confusion in the lands of the Reconquistadoras.
(The reference to the Black Prophet is that of Revelations.)