Assalamu Alaikum und willkommen auf Eurer Webseite für Tafaasir und Übersetzungen von Quran und Sunnah.
Quran
6.114. Soll ich denn einen anderen Schiedsrichter als Allah begehren, wo Er es doch ist, der das Buch, ausführlich dargelegt, zu euch herabgesandt hat? Diejenigen, denen Wir die Schrift gaben, wissen, daß es von deinem Herrn mit der Wahrheit herabgesandt wurde. So gehöre ja nicht zu den Zweiflern.
61.6. Wa-idh qala AAiisa ibnumaryama ya banii isra-iila innii rasuulu Allahiilaykum musaddiqan lima bayna yadayya mina alttawratiwamubaschschiran birasuulin ya/tii min baAAdii ismuhu ahmadufalammadschaahum bialbayyinati qaluuhatha sihrun mubiinun
61.6. And when Jesus son of Mary said: O Children of Israel! Lo! I am the messenger of Allah unto you, confirming that which was (revealed) before me in the Torah, and bringing good tidings of a messenger who cometh after me, whose name is the Praised One. Yet when be hath come unto them with clear proofs, they say: This is mere magic. (Pickthall)
61.6. Und als Isa, Sohn Marjams, sagte: "Ihr, Kinder Israils, ich bin der Gesandte Allahs zu euch, bestätigend, was vor mir ist von der Taura und als Überbringer guter Kunde von einem Gesandten, - er kommt nach mir, sein Name ist Ahmad", und als er zu ihnen kam mit den klaren Beweisen, sagten sie: "Dies ist klare Zauberei." (Ahmad v. Denffer)
61.6. Und als ´Isa, der Sohn Maryams, sagte: "O Kinder Isra´ils, gewiß, ich bin Allahs Gesandter an euch, das bestätigend, was von der Tora vor mir (offenbart) war, und einen Gesandten verkündend, der nach mir kommen wird: sein Name ist Ahmad´." Als er nun mit den klaren Beweisen zu ihnen kam, sagten sie: "Das ist deutliche Zauberei." (Bubenheim)
61.6. Einst sagte Jesus, Marias Sohn: "O ihr Kinder Israels! Ich bin von Gott zu euch gesandt worden, bestätige die vor mir offenbarte Thora und verkünde die frohe Botschaft, dass ein Gesandter namens Ahmad nach mir kommen wird." Als er ihnen die Beweiszeichen darlegte, sprachen sie: "Das ist offenkundige Zauberei." (Azhar)
61.6. Und (erinnere daran), als 'Isa Ibnu-Maryam sagte: „Kinder Israil! Gewiß, ich bin ALLAHs Gesandter zu euch bestätigend dessen, was vor mir von At-taurat war, und überbringend eine frohe Botschaft von einem Gesandten, der nach mir kommt, dessen Name Ahmad (Gelobter) ist.“ Und als er zu ihnen mit den klaren Zeichen kam, sagten sie: „Dies ist eine eindeutige Magie.“ (Zaidan)
61.6. Und (damals) als Jesus, der Sohn der Maria, sagte: "Ihr Kinder Israel! Ich bin von Allah zu euch gesandt, um zu bestätigen, was von der Thora vor mir da war, und einen Gesandten, dessen Name Ahmad ist, zu verkünden, der nach mir kommen wird." Als er dann mit den klaren Beweisen (baiyinaat) zu ihnen kam, sagten sie: "Das ist offensichtlich Zauberei". (Paret)
61.6. Und da sagte Jesus, der Sohn der Maria: "O ihr Kinder Israels, ich bin Allahs Gesandter bei euch, der Bestätiger dessen, was von der Thora vor mir gewesen ist, und Bringer der frohen Botschaft eines Gesandten, der nach mir kommen wird. Sein Name wird Ahmad sein." Und als er zu ihnen mit den Beweisen kam, sagten sie: "Das ist ein offenkundiger Zauber." (Rasul)
Tafsir von Maududi für die Ayaat 6 bis 6
And remember ( 6 ) what Jesus, son of Mary, had said: "O children of Israel, I am indeed a Messenger sent to you by Allah, confirming the Torah which has come before me ( 7 ) and giving the good news of a Messenger who shall come after me, whose name shall be Ahmad. " ( 8 )
Desc No: 6 This relates to the second disobedience of the children of Israel. The first disobedience they committed in the beginning of their great era of power and prosperity, and this second towards the very end of it, after which they came under the wrath and curse of God for ever and ever. The object of relating these two events here is to warn the Muslims of the consequences of adopting the attitude of disobedience towards their Prophet as the Israelites had adopted towards their Prophet.
Desc No: 7 This sentence has three meanings and all three are correct: (1) "That I have not brought any new religion, but the same religion that the Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) had brought. I have not come to repudiate the Torah, but to confirm it just as the Messengers of God have always been confirming the Messengers who came before them. Therefore, there is no reason why you should hesitate to acknowledge my apostleship. " (2) "I answer to the good news that is there in the Torah about my advent. Therefore, instead of opposing me you should receive, and welcome me as the one whose coming had been foretold by the former Prophets." (3) The Third meaning becomes obvious when the sentence is read along with the sentence which follows it and it is this: "I confirm the good news given by the Torah about the coming of Allah's Messenger, named Ahmad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings), and give the good news of his coming myself. " According to this third meaning. this saying of the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) alludes to the good news which the Prophet Moses (peace be on him) had given to his people about the advent of the Holy Messenger of Allah (upon whom be Allah's peace). In it he says:
"The Lord thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken. According to all that thou desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the Lord said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken- I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him." (Deut. 18: 15-19).
This is an express prophecy of the Torah, which applies to none but the Holy Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings). In it the Prophet Moses is conveying to his people this direction of Allah: "I will raisc up for you a Prophet from among your brethren". Obviously, the "brethren" of a nation cannot be a tribe or a family of the nation itself, but another nation to which it is related racially. If it had implied the coming of a Prophet from among the children of Israel themselves, the words would have been to the effect: ¦I shall raise up a Prophet for you from among yourselves." Hence, the "brethren of the Israelites' can inevitably imply the Ishmaelites, who are their relatives by lineage, being the children of the Prophet Abraham (peace be on him). Moreover, no Israelite Prophet can correspond to this prophecy for the reason also that not one but many Prophets appeared among the Israelites after the prophet Moses and the Bible is replete with their history.
The other thing foretold in the prophecy is that the Prophet to be raised up would be `like into the Prophet Moses". This obviously does not imply that he would resemble the Prophet Moses in physical features or circumstances of life, for in this respect no individual can ever be like another individual; it also dces not mean the resemblance in the characteristics of Prophethood, for this characteristic is common to all those _Prophets, who came after the Prophet Moses. Therefore. no Prophet can have this quality that he should be like unto him in this characteristic Thus, resemblance in these two aspects becomes out of the question. The only aspect of resemblance on the basis of which the peculiarity of a Prophet of the future becomes understandable is that that Prophet should be a bearer of Divine Law like the Prophet Moses. And this peculiarity is found in none but the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings), for all the Prophets who appeared before him among the Israelites were the followers of the Law of Moses; none of them had brought a permanent Divine Law of his own.
This interpretation is further strengthened by these words of the prophecy. 'According to all that thou (i.e. the Israelites) desiredst of the Lord thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the Lord thy God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not. And the Lord said unto them, They have well spoken that which they have spoken. I will raisc them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth." In this passage Horeb means the mountain on which the Prophet Moses had received the Divine Law first of all, and the prayer that the Israelites made was: "If we are given a Divine Law in the further, it should not be given us under the dreadful conditions like those which were created at the foot of Mt. Horeb while giving us the Law." These conditions have been mentioned both in the Qur'an and in the Bible. (See AI-Baqarah: 55, 56, 63; AI-A'raf: 155, 171. Bible: Exodus, 19: 17- 18). In answer to it, the Prophet Moses tells the Israelites; 'Allah has granted your prayer. Ho says that He will raise up a Prophet for you, in whose mouth He will put His own words." That is, at the time of bestowing the Dew Divine Law, He will not create the dreadful conditions which were created at the foot of Mt. Horeb. Instead of that, Divine Words will be put in the mouth of the Prophet who would be appointed to that office, ant he will recite those Words before the people. A study of this explanation leaves no room for the doubt that the prophecy applies to another than the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace). Only he after the Prophet Moses has been granted an enduring and permanent Divine Law. At its bestowal no assembly of the people was called as was called of the Israelites at the foot of MI. Horeb, and no such conditions were created during the) time it was bestowed as were created in their case there.
Desc No: 8 This is a very important verse of the Qur'an, which has been subjected to severe adverse criticism as well as treated with the worst kind of criminal dishonesty by the opponents of Islam, for it says that the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) had given the good news of the coming of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings) by name. Therefore, it is necessary that we study and discuss it in some detail. (1) In this Verse the name mentioned of the Holy Prophet (on whom be peace) is Ahmad. Ahmad has two meanings: the one who gives the highest praise to Allah, and the one who is most highly praised by others, or the one who is most worthy of praise among men. Authentic traditions confirm that this too was a well known name of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace). Muslim and Abu Da'ud Tayalisi have related on the authority of Hadrat Abu Musa al-Ash'ari that the Holy Prophet said: "I am Muhammad, I am Ahmad, and I am the Assembler. .. " Other traditions on the subject have been related by Imam Malik, Bukhari, Muslim, Darimi, Tirmidhi, and Nasa'i from Hadrat Jubair bin Mut'im, This name of the Holy Prophet was well known among the Companions as is borne out by the poetry of Hadrat Hassan bin Thabit. (Verse cited is omitted).
It is also confirmed by history that the sacred name of the Holy Prophet was not only Muhammad but also Ahmad. Arabic literature bears evidence that nobody in Arabia had been named Ahmad before the Holy Prophet, and after him innumerable people have been named Ahmad and Ghulam Ahmad (slave of Ahmad in the. world. This is the greatest proof that since his Prophethood this name has been most well known among the people of his community. Had it not been a name of the Holy Prophet, to which Ahmad's slavery did the parents, who named their children 'Ghulam Ahmad", assign them? (2) The Gospel of St. John bears evidence that at the advent of the Prophet Jesus Christ, the Israelites were awaiting the appearance of three persons: of the Christ, of Elias (i.e. the second coming of the Prophet Elias) and of 'that prophet". In the words of the Gospel:
"And this is the record of John (the Prophet John: Yahya) when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? And ho confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. And they asked him What then? Art thou Elias? And be saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? He said, I am the voice of one crying in the wilderness! Make straight the way of the Lord as said the prophet Esaias. And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet?" (John, 1: 19-25)
These words expressly show that the Israelites were awaiting another Prophet besides the Prophet Christ and the Prophet Elias, and he was not the Prophet John. The belief about the coming of that Prophet was so well known and well established among the Israelites that a mere reference to him as "that prophet" was enough to call attention to him without any need to add: "The one who has been foretold in the Torah. " Furthermore, it also shows that the advent of the prophet to whom they were referring was absolutely confirmed, for when these questions were asked of the Prophet John, he did not say that no other prophet was to come and therefore the questions were irrelevant.
Consider now the predictions that have been cited in the Gospel of St. John from chapter 14 to chapter 16 continuously:
'And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of tnrth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you. " (14: 16-17)
'These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you. But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you. " (14: 25-26)
'Hereafter I will not talk much with you: for the prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me. " (14: 30)
"But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of tnrth, which proceedeth from the Father, he shall testify of me." (15: 26)
"Nevertheless I tell you the truth: It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you. " (16: 7)
"I have yet many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will show you things to come. He shall glorify me: for he shall receive of mine, and shall show it unto you. AII things that the Father hath arc mine: ' therefore said I, that he shall take of mine, and shall show it unto you. " (16: 12 15) (4) In order to determine the exact meaning of these passages one should first know that the language spoken by the Prophet Jesus and his contemporary Palestinians was a dialect of the Aramaic language, called Syriac. More than 200 years before the birth of Jesus when the Seleucides came to power Hebrew bad become extinct in this territory and been replaced by Syriac. Although under the influence of the Seleucide and then the Roman empires, Grace also had reached this area, it remained confined only to that class of the people, who after having access to the higher government circles, or in order to seek access to them, had become deeply Hellenized. The Common Palestinians used a particular dialect of Syriac, the accents and pronunciations and idioms of which were different from the Syriac spoken in and around Damascus. The common people of the country were wholly unaware of Greek. So much so that when in A.D. 70 the Roman Genera( Titus, after taking Jerusalem, addressed the citizens in Greek, he had to be translated into Syriac, This makes it evident that whatever the Prophet Jesus spoke to his disciples must necessarily be only in Syriac.
Secondly, one should know that all the four Gospels contained In the Bible werc written by the reek-speaking Christians, who had entered Christianity after the Prophet Jesus. The traditions of the sayings and acts of the Prophet Jesus reached them through the Syriac speaking Christians not in the written form but as oral traditions, and they translated these Syriac traditions into their own language and incorporated them in their books. None of the extant Gospels was written before 70; the Gospel of St. John was compiled n century after the Prophet Jesus probably in Ephesus, a city in Asia Minor. Moreover, no original copy even of these Gospels in Greek, in which these were originally written, exists. None of the Greek manuscripts that have been discovered and collected from here and there and which all belong to the period before the inventions of printing dates before the 4th century. Therefore, it is difficult to say what changes might have taken place in these during the first three centuries What makes it particularly doubtful is that the Christians have been regarding it as quite lawful to romper with their Gospels intentionally as and when they liked. The author of the article "Bible" in Encyclopaedia Britannica (Ed. 19731 writes:
'The main source of the evidence and of the variations are the manuscripts of the N.T., dating from the and to the 10th century or even later. In the process of copying, these manuscripts underwent the revisions that necessitate textual criticism. Some of these revisions were unintentional, as the scribe skipped a word or a line or as he mistook one character for another. Other revisions came from the desire of the scribe to harmonize the text of one Gospel with another or of one Testament with the other; or from his pious wish to "correct" or clarify the text at another point. But now that variations in the text exist, collection of the manuscripts is a difficult task." (Sec "Bible" in Encyclopaedia Britannica, 1973).
Under such conditions as these, it is very difficult to say with absolute certainty that the sayings of the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) found in the Gospels, have been preserved, reproduced and cited faithfully and accurately, and that no change has taken place anywhere.
The third and a very vital point is that even after the conquest by the Muslims, for about three centuries, the Palestine Christians retained Syriac, which was not replaced by Arabic until the 9th century A.D. The information that the Muslim scholars of the first three centuries obtained through the Syriac speaking Christians about the Christian traditions, should be more authentic and reliable than the information of those people whom it reached through translation after translation from Syriac into Greek and then from Greek into Latin. For there were greater chances of the original Syriac words spoken by the Prophet Jesus remaining preserved with the Palestinian Christians than with others. (5) Keeping these un-deniable historical facts in mind let us consider the fact that in the passages cited from St. John's Gospel above, the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) is giving the news about one coming after him, about whom he says: "He will be `the prince of this world' (Sarwar `Alam) "he shall abide with you for ever," "he will guide you into all truth," and ¦he shall testify of me" (i.e. of Jesus himself). By interpolating words like "the Holy Ghost" and "the Spirit of truth", `in the passages of St. John. every effort hag been made to corrupt the real meaning, but despite that if these passages are read carefully, one can clearly see that the one whose coming has been foretold, will not be a spirit but a man, and an extraordinary man, whose teaching will be universal, all pervasive and enduring till the Last Day. For this particular person the word 'Madadgar" (helper) has been used in the Urdu translation, and the Greek word used in St John's original Gospel, according to the Christians, was Peracletus. But the Christian scholars themselves have been faced with great difficulties in determinging its meaning. In the original Greek Paraclete has several meanings: to call to a particular place, to call for help, to warn, to tempt and incite, to implore and pray. Moreover, in Hellenic sense, it gives these meanings: to console, to give satisfaction, to encourage. Wherever this word has been used in the Bible, it dces pot fit in well with the context anywhere. Origen has translated it Consolateor at some places and Deprecator at others. But the other commentators have rejected both these translations, for in the first place these are not correct according to Greek grammar; second, these meanings do not go well with context wherever this word has occurred in the passages. Some other translators have translated it Teacher, but this meaning too, cannot be derived from the Greek usage, Tertullian and Augustine have preferred the word Advocate, and some other scholars have adopted words like Assistant, Comforter, Cosoler, etc. (See Cyclopaedia of Biblical Literature under "Peracletus"). (6) Now, it is interesting to note that in Greek itself there is another word periclytos, which means "the Praised One". This word is exactly synonymous with `Muhammad". In pronunciation it closely resembles Peracletus. It cannot be a remote possibility that the Christians who have been used to making alterations in their religious books as and when they liked, might have effected e little variation in the spelling of this word in the prophecy related by St. John when they saw that it went against their set belief and creed. The original Greek Gospel composed by St. John dces not exist either; therefore it is not possible to check which of the two words had actually been used in it. (7) But the decision is not solely dependent on this as to which word had St. John actually used in Greek, for in any case that too was, a translation and the Prophet Jesus language, as we have explained above, was Palestinian Syriac. Therefore, the word that he might have used in his good news must necessarily be a Syriac word. Fortunately, we find that original Syriac word in the Life of Muhammad by Ibn Hisham. Along with that we also come to know its synonymous Greek word from the same book. Ibn Hisham, on the authority of Ibn Ishaq, has reproduced the complete translation of 15: 23-27 and of 16:1 of the Gospel according to yuhannus (Yuhanna: John), and has used the Syriac word Munhamanna instead of the Greek Paraclete. Then, Ibn Ishaq or Ibn Hisham has explained it thts: The Munhamanna in Syriac means Muhammad and in Greek the Peracletus. (Ibn Hisham, vol. 1, p. 248).
Now, historically, the Historical of the common Palestinian Christians until the 9th century A.D. was Syriac. This land was included in the Islamic territories in the first half of the 7th century. Ibn Ishaq died in 768 A.D. and Ibn Hisham in 828 A.D. This means that in the time of both the Palestinian Christians spoke Syriac, and for neither it was difficult to have contacts with the Christian subjects of their country. Moreover, in those days there also lived lacs of Greek speaking Christians in the Islamic territories. Therefore, It was also not difficult for them to find out which particular word of Greek was synonymous with a certain word of Syriac. Now, if in the translation reproduced by Ibn Ishaq the Syriac word Munhamanna has been used, and Ibn Ishaq or Ibn Hisham has explained that its Arabic equivalent is Muhammad and Greek Peracletus, there remains no room for the doubt that the Prophet Jesus had given the good news of the coming of the Holy Prophet himself by name. Along with that it also becomes known that in the Greek Gospel of John the word actually used was Periclytos. which the Christian scholars changed into Peracletus at some later time. (8) Even an older historical evidence in this connection is the following tradition from Hadrat 'Abdullah bin Mas'ud:
'When the Negus sununoned the Emigrants from Makkah to his court and heard the teachings of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace) from Hadrat Ja'far bin Abi Talib, he said; 'God bless you and him from whom you have come! I bear witness that he is Messenger of Allah, and he is the same one whose mention we find in the Gospel, and the same one good news about whom had been given by Jesus son of Mary."' (Musnad Ahmad This has been related in Hadih from Hadrat Ja'far himself and also from Hadrat Umm Salamah. This not only proves that in the beginning of the 7th century the Negus knew that the Prophet Jestts had foretold the coming of a Prophet, but also that a clear pointer to 'that prophet" existed in the Gospel on the basis of which the Negus did not take long to from the opinion that the Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings) was that prophet. However, from this tradition one cannot know whether the source of information with the Negus about the good news given by the Prophet Jesus was this same Gospel of St. John, or whether there existed some other means also at that time for this information. (9) The tnrth is that the four Gospels which the Christian Church has recognized as Canonical are neither an authentic means of knowing the Prophet Jestts' Prophecies about the Holy Prophet nor are they a reliable source for knowing the correct biography and the original teachings of the Prophet Jesus himself, but by far the more trust-worthy means for this is the Gospel of Barnabas which the Church has declared as heretical and apocryphal. The Christians have done whatever they could to conceal it, and it remained lost to the world for centuries. In the 16th century only one copy of its Italian translation existed in the library of Pope Sixtus V, and no one was allowed to read it. In the beginning of the 18th century it came into the hands of one John Toland. Then, changing different hands it found its way in 1738 into the Imperial Library of Vienna, In 1907 an English translation of this Italian manuscript was printed at the Clarendon Press, Oxford, but probably soon after its printing the Christian world realized that the book cut at the very root of the Faith which was attributed to the Prophet Jesus. Therefore, its printed copies were destroyed somehow, and then it never went into print any more. Another copy of it, a Spanish translation from the Italian manuscript, existed in the 18th century, which has been mentioned by George Sale in his Preface and Preliminary Discourse to the English translation of the Qur'an. This too was made to disappear, and no trace of it exists anywhere today. j had a chance to sec a photostat of the English translation published from Oxford and I have read it word by word. I feel that it is indeed a great blessing of which the Christians have kept themselves deprived only out of prejudice and stubbornness;
Wherever this Gospel is mentioned in Christian literature, it iII condenmed as a forged Gospel, which perhaps some Muslim has composed and ascribed to Barnabas. But this is a great falsehood which has been uttered only for the reason that it contains at several places clear prophecies about the Holy Prophet Muhammad (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings). In the first place, a perusal of this Gospel shows that it could not have been written by a Muslim. Secondly, had it been written by a Muslim, it would have spread extensively among the Muslims and the writings of the Islamic scholars would have contained plentiful references to it. On the contrary. the Muslims had no knowledge of its existence before George Sale wrote his Preliminary Discourse to his translation of the . Qur'an. No mention of any kind is found of the Gospel of Barnabas in the books of the Muslim writers like Tabari, Yaqubi, Mas'udi, Al-Benrni, Ibn Hazm and others, who were fully conversant with Christian litrature when they discuss Christianity The best catalogues of the books found in the libraries of the Islamic world were Al-Fihrist of Ibn an-Nadim and Kashfas-Zunnun of Haji-Khalifah, and these too are without any mention of it. No Muslim scholar before the 19th century has ever mentioned the name of the Gospel of Barnabas, The third and most important argument to refute the claim that the Gospel has been written by a Muslim is that about 75 years before the birth of the Holy Prophet (peace'be upon him). in the time of Pogo Gelasius I, the list prepared of unanonical books, which were banned for reading by a Papal decree also included the Gospel of Barnabas (Evangelium Barnabe). The question is: Who was the Muslim at that time, who forged this Gospel? The Christian scholars themselves have admitted that the Gospel of Barnabas remained prevalent in Syria, Spain, Egypt, etc. during the early days of Christianity for a long time and that it was banned as heretical in the 6th century . (10) Before we reproduce the good news given by the Prophet Jesus about the advent of the Holy Prophet from this Gospel, it would be useful to Introduce it briefly so that the reader may know its importance and also understand why the Christians are so angry with it.
None of the writers of the four Gospels which have been included in the Bible as authentic and canonical, was a companion of the Prophet Jesus, and none of them has either made the claim that the information recorded by him in his Gospel was obtained from the companions of the Prophet Jesus, They have, in fact, made no mention of the sources from which they obtained their information, which could show whether the reporter himself witnessed the events and heard the sayings that he was describing or whether they reached him through one or more than one transmitters. On the contrary, the author of the Gospel of Barnabas states that he is one of the original twelve disciples of Jesus, that he followed Jesus from the beginning till the end, and that he is recording the events that be witnessed with his own eyes and the sayings that he heard with his own ears. Not only this. In the end of the Book he says that on his departure from the world the Prophet Jesus had made him responsible for removing the prevalent misunderstandings about himself and for informing the world of the correct events.
Who was this Barnabas? In the Acts of the Apostles a person so named is very frequently mentioned. He came of a Jewish family of Cyprus. He has been praised for his services in connection with the preaching of Christianity and rendering help and assistance to the followers of the Christ. But nowhere has it been told as to when ho embraced Christianity; his name does not either appear in the list of the twelve original disciples, which has been given in the three Gospels. Therefore, one cannot say that the author of this Gospel is the same Barnabas or some other person. The list of the disciples given by Barnabas differs from the one given by Matthew and Mark only in two names: Thomas instead of whom Barnabas has given his own name and Simon the Canaanitc instead of whom he has named Judas son of Jacob. In the Gospel of Luke this second name is also there. Therefore, it would be correct to assume that some time later only in order to exclude Barnabas from the disciples the name of Thomas was included so as to be rid of his Gospel. To effect such changes in their scriptures has never been anything unlawful with the Christian scholars.
If one goes through the Gospel with an unbiased mind and compares it with the four Gospels of the New Testament, one cannot help feeling that it is far superior to them. In it the events of the life of the Prophet Jesus (peace be on him) have been described in much greater detail, in a manner as though somebody vas actually witnessing what was happening and was himself a partner in those events. As against the incoherent stories of the four Gospels this historical account is more coherent. From it one can fully well understand the series of events unfolding themselves. In it the teachings of the Prophet Jesus have been given in a clearer, more effective and expanded form than in the other Gospels. The themes of the Unity of God, refutation of polytheism, attributes of God, essence of worship and morality have been presented in a most forceful, rational and exhaustive way. In the other Gospels one does not find evcn a fraction of the instructive parables which clothe the themes This Gospel also shows in much greater detail what wist methods the Prophet Jesus used for the teaching and training of his disciples. Anyone who has any acquaintance with the language, style and temperament of the Prophet Jesus will be compelled to admit after a perusal of this Gospel that it is not a fictitious document, which might have been forged in a later period. But the truth is that in it the Prophet Jesus appears before us in his true grandeur and glory much more conspicuously than anywhere in the four canonical Gospels. In it there is no trace of those contradictions which abound in the four Gospels in respect of his different sayings.
In the Gospel of Barnabas the life of the Prophet Jesus and his teachings are found precisely according to the life and teachings of a Prophet of God. He presents himself as a Prophet, and confirms all the former Prophets and Books. He clearly states that there is no other means of knowing the truth except through the teachings of the Prophets, and the one who abandons the Prophets, in fact, abandons God. He presents the doctrines of the Unity of God, Apostleeship, and the Hereafter precisely as taught by all the Prophets. He exhorts the people to perform the Prayer, observe the Fast and pay the Zakat. The description that Barnabas has given of his Prayers at a number of places shows that the times he observed for his Prayers were the same times of Fajr (Dawn), Zuhr (Early afternoon), `Asr (Late afternoon), Maghrib, 'Isha (Late Evening) and
){kind=link}