❞ كتاب Forgotten Saint The Gospel of Barnabas ❝ ⏤ عمر زيد

Contents
Introduction 6
The Schism: Part One 8
The Schism: Part Two 17
True Pharisees 21
History & Criticism 29
The Kingdom of God (Commentary) 37
The Jesuit Menace 47
Bibliography 52
Appendix I 56
On the Myth of Apostolic Succession
Appendix II 58
The Tribe of Dan Today
Appendix III 60
THE 'DECRETUM GELASIANUM DE LIBRIS
RECIPIENDIS ET NON RECIPIENDIS'
Appendix IV. 65
Origin of the Nazarenes and Ebionites
Appendix V 67
The GoB Manuscripts
Appendix VI 70
The School of the Prophets
Appendix VII 73
The Mark Of Cain
Appendix VIII 76
The Jesuit Oath
Index 78
Endnotes 84

Little is known of Barnabas, the one time companion of Paul. It is said
they journeyed as missionaries to the island of Cyprus. In those days
people believed their  ̳gods‘ would visit them at will, and there, in Lystra,
the two men are reported to have performed such astonishing miracles
that the appreciative Lystrans prepared to sacrifice a bull in their honor as
touring deities. Barnabas was the elder and I suspect his demeanor
prompted the Lystrans to mistake him for their chief god, Saturn, while
they named the less imposing figure of Paul,

1 Mercury, known as the

messenger of his rather austere and imposing sire.
On pondering this New Testament (NT) anecdote, I queried why
Paul is said to be responsible for two-thirds of the NT while Barnabas is
barely known and none of his literature has reached us... or has it? The
answer is not readily made with certainty as is so much of what is
contained in the NT since Constantine‘s imposition of the spurious text.2
One thing is assured however: no sincere monotheist with knowledge of

Paul is described as a bit gnome-like in habitus‘ — hardly a model for the athletic
mold of Mercury: ―... a man of small stature, with a bald head and crooked legs, in a
good state of body, with eyebrows meeting and the nose somewhat hooked, full of
friendliness ...‖ from: A description by Onesiphorus, Giuseppe Riciotti: Paul the
Apostle, Milwaukee, Bruce, 1953, pp 153-159
2
―Constantine was the ruling spirit at Nicaea and he ultimately decided upon a new
god for them. To involve British factions [his antecedents], he ruled that the name of
the mighty Druid god, Hesus (crucified in Britain and later restored to life), be
joined with the Eastern savior-god, Krishna (Krishna is Sanskrit for ―Christ‖), and
thus a caricature, or the personification of an ideal, Hesus Krishna, would be the
name of the new Roman god. A vote was taken and it was with a majority show of
hands that both divinities became one God . . . 161 votes to 157. Following
longstanding heathen custom, Constantine used the official gathering and the Roman
Apotheoses Decree to legally deify two deities as one, and did so by democratic
consent. A new god was proclaimed and  ̳officially ratified by Constantine‘ (Acta
Concilii Niceni, Colon, 1618)... [“Krishnianity”] ... and when the letter  ̳J‘ was
introduced into alphabets around the Ninth Century, the linguistic relic of the name
became  ̳Jesus Christ.‘ ‖ [NB: the letter ―J‖ was not introduced to English until the
16th Century.] – The Papal Billions, Tony Bushby, (Queensland, Australia, Joshua
Books, 2008) pp. 23-25. ISBN 978-0-9804101-1-2

the prophetic monotheist history will be able to read the Gospel ascribed
to Barnabas without a similar assessment as was made by the people of
Lystra. The works credited to Paul pale when compared to the singular
gravity of the GoB‘s core content. Moreover, the man presented by both
writers as Jesus (Prophet Isa) is hardly recognizable as the same person.
The truth of the matter remains in the realm of reasonably cogent
speculation, and otherwise with Allah swt.
What this book attempts is to:
1. Review the historicity of the Gospel of Barnabas (GoB);
2. Discuss the core content of this work in light of the schism
between James and Paul;
3. Lay groundwork for further discourse;
4. Attempt to place the entire matter in perspective with a view to
err on the side of caution both for scholars and laymen who may
enthusiastically misuse the work for errant polemics and / or
Dakwah.
5. Provide commentary relevant to current events in light of the
schism and polemics in which Barnabas ― and later this Gospel
― played / play a pivotal role.

I owe a word of gratitude to Prof. Emeritus Osman Bakar for
suggesting and then guiding this survey after he named it  ̳Forgotten
Saint‘. I added the  ̳s‘ for reasons made clear below. I also thank those
who preceded us in taking serious interest in this work. May Allah
reward them and guide us in our review of a chapter and work from the
theological chronicles that remains in the many shadows of suspicion and
ambiguity.
Omar Zaid, M.D.

The Schism, Part I
―The Apostle Barnabas is an important character in early Christian
sources but what few independent historical sources we have from
that period make no mention of him, nor of anyone like him...
Given this small amount of information, and the fact that he does
not appear outside of Christian sources, it must be admitted that we
cannot say for certain that he was even a real, historical figure...
Christian and even secular writers regularly assume that Luke's Acts
of the Apostles is a reliable historical source. More objective
appraisals of Acts, however, dismiss it as a pseudo-historical
Hellenistic romance from the second century CE and maintain that
it cannot be trusted at all... The first part of Acts is highly
mythologized; only the second half seems to have some kernel of
actual historical reportage. As it happens, notices concerning
Barnabas-appear entirely within the first part of Acts. In fact, the
point at which the mythologized section ends and the 'We
document' begin coincides more or less with the point at which
Barnabas drops out of the narrative. In the Pauline epistles, on the
other hand, Barnabas-Appears in the letters that even the most
skeptical critics tend to nominate as authentic, the Letter to the
Galatians especially. Outside of Acts and Paul's letters most
orthodox notices of Barnabas refer to an Epistle written in his
name. Some early Fathers of the Church supported moves to
include this epistle in the canon. Ultimately, it was rejected but it
still had a place of honor among early Christian writings. We can
be confident, however, that the Barnabean epistle is
pseudepigraphica: it was not written by the historical Barnabas
despite claims that are sometimes made for it. It is, for a start, a
deeply anti-Semitic work and, as a rule of thumb, Jews – even
"Christian" Jews – do not write anti-Semitic works. Muslim
enthusiasts for the medieval Gospel of Barnabas have often
confused this Epistle and references to this Epistle in early Church
literature for a Gospel under Barnabas' name. In fact, there is no
mention of a Gospel according to Barnabas until the sixth
century. Another work, the Acts of Barnabas, is clearly late and
adds little that is useful to our understanding of this character. It
records that he went to Cyprus where he was martyred at the hands
of Jebusites – said to be kinsmen of Nero – who had recognized

him as a companion of Paul. The Acts of Barnabas is the main
source from which Barnabas is nominated as the patron saint of
Cyprus.‖ 3
This extract of Prof. Blackhirst‘s summations can hardly be
improved on. Clement of Alexandria (c.150 - 211/216) and Eusubeus (c.
263-339), 4

both claim that Barnabas was one of the seventy disciples
mentioned in Luke‘s Gospel; men whom Jesus sent throughout the Holy
Land to proclaim the  ̳nearness‘ of the  ̳Kingdom of God‘.1
The
 ̳Kingdom of God‘ is the central theme of the NT as expounded in
footnote (i). Furthermore, the citations just noted may be significant, for
if this Barnabas is the author of the core content or central theme of the
GoB, Clement and Eusubius place him in a position of closer proximity
to Prophet Isa than Occidental commentators would like to acknowledge.
The supposed author of the work we now consider claims to have
followed Jesus for the better part of his ministry and for the purpose of
recording the Master‘s words and deeds. If this is so, then he‘s a likely
candidate for author of the lost book known as the ―Sayings of Isa‖ or
injiil.

As it is presently, commentators and church historians generally
have  ̳Barnabas the Apostle‘ joining the group of Apostles sometime after
the crucifixion – i.e., post-Pentecost to be exact. Therefore, I will use
―Barnabas-G‖ when discussing the Apostle whose historicity is primarily
established on the basis of the suspect NT, and when referring to the
3 Dr R. Blackhirst, 'Barnabas and the Gospels: Was there an Early Gospel of Barnabas?'
The Journal of Higher Criticism, Vol. 7, No. 1, 2000. Prof. Blackhirst has over fifteen
years experience as a tutor, lecturer and supervisor across the Arts and Humanities
disciplines. The focus of his teaching is in Philosophy and Religious Studies. He
currently teaches at La Trobe University, Australia, where he offers the following
package of units and modules of study: Introducing Religious Studies (Sacred Texts),
Islam and the West, Renaissance Art, Traditional Cosmologies, Medieval Studies,
The Biblical World, Lost Texts & Apocrypha - Doctoral Dissertation entitled 'Myth in
the Timaeus: the Mythological Underpinnings of Plato's Cosmology'. The thesis
explores the roots of Plato's cosmology and natural science in Greek mythology and
in the religious cults of ancient Athens.
4 Clement of Alexandria (Strom., II, 20, P.G., VIII, col. 1060) , Eusebius (H. E., II, i,
P.G., XX, col. 117 Ecclesiastical History, Book. VII. II. 1.)

disputed Gospel‘s author, I will use Barnabas. I also ask the reader to
carefully review the footnote on ―The Kingdom of God‖ before
proceeding, as it is the vital theme of this discussion.
Barnabas-G is said to have come from a Levite family of landed
gentry from the Isle of Cyprus. Both he and Paul may have been disciples
of the highly regarded Gemaliel, a revered Jewish theologian and
member of the Sanhedrin who was also a Talmudist and Kabbalist. First
known as  ̳Joseph (Joses) the Levite‘, the Apostles later changed his
name. The Book of Acts (4:36-37) favors the opinion that he converted to
Christianity 5

after Pentecost (about A.D. 29 or 30) then sold his property
and devoted the proceeds to the Church. A few years later he defended
Paul‘s conversion by personally introducing the once feared ―Saul‘ to
Peter and James, after which Paul retired to a self-imposed exile in his
hometown of Tarsus. Barnabas-A remained in Jerusalem gaining a
reputation for exhortation (evangelism) among the Jews. After the death
of Stephen at the hands of Saul (Paul, the self-confessed ―Pharisee of
Pharisees‖ – i.e. an adept Kabbalist),

there had been a dispersion of the
nascent sect and certain  ̳unknown‘ disciples, fleeing north, had much
success getting the first known converts among gentile Greeks in
Antioch. On hearing this, James, the brother of Isa and acknowledged
leader of the Sect in Jerusalem, dispatched Barnabas-G to investigate.
On confirming the news, Barnabas-G immediately went to Tarsus to
recruit Paul for mission work among the Gentiles.
We should bear in mind that this  ̳sect‘ was a microcosmic
restitution of the Mosaic Order, which in essence, is the Spirit of Islam or
peaceful surrender to God‘s Rule and Sovereignty (Kingdom) as manifest
by His Prophets.

 n the form of pdf, authored by Omar Zayed, one of the most important messages that highlighted the forgotten or hidden Gospel, the Gospel of Barnabas, and the author informed us about the contents of this Gospel, why they concealed it or forget it, and what it refutes and denies. There was some confusion in the ranks of the Christians, because of the uncertainty in their faith, and confusion in their faith.