Is the Vatican in shock over a ‘newly discovered’ Bible that says Jesus wasn’t crucified?

Ankara BibleMany people have been circulating this supposed “news,” which isn’t new at all. Nor is the Vatican “shocked” by an old Syriac Bible purportedly from 1,500 years ago. There is nothing new in the Bible that the Vatican’s scholars and other experts have not known about for the past 18 centuries or so.

To begin with, Christian apologists rebut that the so-called Ankara Bible evidently is not 1,500 years old but may date from 1500 AD/CE at the earliest, while also contending that the book may be a “forgery.” In reality, this particular book may not be as ancient as is claimed, but its doctrines were not fabricated at that time.

Indeed, the Ankara Bible’s “strange” doctrines of Jesus not being crucified and other peculiarities are simply a rehash of one of the many strains of Christianity that thrived from the second century AD/CE onward. This Syrian-Arab Christian perspective thus has been around for many centuries, since antiquity, based on the apocryphal Gospel of Barnabas and other such noncanonical texts. The contents of the Gospel of Barnabas include the following:

It generally resonates better with existing Muslim views than with Christianity: it foretells the coming of Muhammad by name; rather than describing the crucifixion of Jesus, it describes him being raised up into heaven, similar to the description of Elijah in 2 Kings, Chapter 2; and it calls Jesus a “prophet” whose mission was restricted to the “house of Israel”.

The ‘name’ Muhammad

As concerns the claim that Barnabas “names” Muhammad/Mohammed, that title simply means “praised” or “praiseworthy,” so any book that includes the Arabic word for “praiseworthy” as an epithet could be said to be “predict Mohammed.” In other words, “Mohammed” is simply a title that could be applied to many people and probably was, long before a historical Mohammed supposedly existed.

In this regard, it is also claimed that the name “Mohammed” was included in the Hebrew Bible or Old Testament/Tanakh, at Song of Songs 5:16, which represents a love song about the singer’s “beloved”:

His speech is most sweet, and he is altogether desirable. This is my beloved and this is my friend, O daughters of Jerusalem.

The Hebrew word here for “desirable” is מחמד machmad, a term Muslim apologists contend is the “prediction” of Mohammed as well.

Neither the Bible nor the Barnabas gospel “predicts Mohammed,” however. If anything, Mohammed is a fictional compilation of characters, and Song of Songs 5, the Barnabas gospel and other apocryphal texts were used to create him, as was done with Moses and Jesus before him. In reality, the ideas in Barnabas evidently were used to create Islam, which includes the book’s heretical doctrines in the Quran. In the end, the gleeful recent touting of this Bible and Gospel basically represents Muslim propaganda.

Again, there were MANY different strains of Christianity beginning in the second century. That’s one very big clue that we are talking about a MYTH.

Further Reading

Gospel of Barnabas
1500 year-old Syriac Bible found in Ankara, Turkey: Vatican in shock!
Is Mohammed a Man or Myth?

4 Comments

Add a Comment
  1. hello, Archaya, I am a fan of your representation, of Religious history. A while ago I contended whit you on Joe Atwills theory of how the Jesus myth came to be(I kow I am digressing) but we disagreed, about the Chrestian question, or the chrestus name, used to describe, the group that and ancient writer says was kicked out of Rome.

    As you have well documented, along with Gerald massey, Sir Wallis Budge, and many scholars before, that Christianity seemed like something out of the ancient Egypttian religion.

    Atwill says that the three Flavian emperors, doing battle with the radical, Messianist, Jews in the first century Ad, in conjunction with the Jewish, radical, turncoat, priest, known to history as Josephus Flavian, probably with the help of the Jewish temple priest and no doubt biblical scholars, who escaped, right, before Titus and his army destroyed the second temple.

    Well, here’s were both the Egyptian angle, the chrestus, or good, God angle, and later I will give you an isis, Anubis angle, all come together. On the academia.edu scholarly website, it has a paper, written, about Domitian and the Contra temple in Karnak.

    And it explains, how a whole new wall, was added to the Temple, of a type of Amen, said to be more accessible, to the people to the people, and in it it describes Domitians hymn to a child god, reminiscent of Heru(Horus) and Jesus, and it uses, the word Chrestian to describe the God, and it intimates Domician as the son of Ra and the ruler of upper and lower kemet(Egypt). From reading your site, it seems to me that, the only problem with Atwills Hypothesis and your own, is that you think the Jesus, myth was created , a century or so, later around 70-90 ad.f I’m wrong on that, let me know, anyway, here are snippets from that scholarly paper.In addition, a sceneof Domitian praising a child god and Amun wasadded to the east face of the northern obelisk encasement

    53

    , and a parallel scene most likely existed on the now damaged southern chapel.Most notable, however, was the addition of anew eastern portal to the temple, constructedand decorated in the reign of Domitian

    54

    . A lengthy hymn, paralleled to a large extent by a similar hymn to Amun from the Ptah Tem-ple at Karnak, accompanies the scene of Domi-tian praising Amun.

    Text 1 (= Tf. XVII)

    551

    nTr nfr ir iAw n it=f sA-tA n nTry n Ra

    a

    HfA tyt n kA-nsw.t-anx

    b

    nH.t n ir [sw m] HH.wDd md.w

    2

    ii.n=i xr=k a.wy=i m iAwib=i apr.ti m sAx.wdwA=i n Hm=k m DAis.w stp.w

    c

    m mAT.w nfr.w nw […][…] r-Aw n

    3

    gb.t sni-tA r Sn n pA tAdwA=i nTr n=k m swr bAw=k mi wr kA=k r nTr.w

    d

    iw=i m aoA Dd.w

    e

    m[…][..] nb

    4

    tp-rA.wHn=(i) kA=k m xm=[k]ir=i n=k mdw=k Hr-tp n xAs.wt nb

    f

    Hr xrp bAk.t=sn r arry.t[=k…]

    g

    […] m wD[=k]

    5

    [x]a.ti m nsw.t-biti Hr s.t-@r xnty kA.w [anx.w]

    1

    The good god, who praises his father, who makes acclamation for the heart of Re, who praises the image of the living Royal Ka, who beseeches he who made [himself into] millions. Words spoken:

    52

    PM II

    2

    , p. 218 (34); Varille, ASAE 50 (1950):167-8, Pls. XXXVI–XXXVII.

    53

    PM II

    2

    , p. 218 (38); Varille, ASAE 50 (1950):163–5, Pls. XXXI, 1 and XXXIII.

    54

    PM II

    2

    , p. 216 (14) (a)–(b); Varille, ASAE 50(1950): 168, Pl. XXII; Barguet, Le temple d’Amon-Rêà Karnak, pp. 221–2; the reading of the cartouche asDomitian was established by Sauneron, BIFAO 53(1953): 149–52.

    55

    Varille, ASAE 50 (1950): 163–5, Pls. XXXI, 1and XXXIII; a color photo can be found in Hölbl, Altägypten im Römischen Reich, I, p. 57, Abb. 53.

    2

    That I have come before you,is with my arms in praise,my mind equipped with transfiguration spells,so I might worship your majesty with choice utterances, with beautiful thoughts of [. . .][. . .] to the limits of the

    3

    sky,making proscynesis to the whole circuit of the earth,so I might praise you with that which aggran-dizes your

    bAw

    -manifestation,as your Ka is greatest of the gods,I am correct of speech in [. . .][. . .] lord

    4

    of utterances.I hereby provision your Ka in [your] sanctuary,and I act as your staff over all foreign lands,

    Here is what it said about Domitian, praising a Child god.

    In addition, a sceneof Domitian praising a child god and Amun wasadded to the east face of the northern obelisk encasement

    53

    , and a parallel scene most likely existed on the now damaged southern chapel.Most notable, however, was the addition of anew eastern portal to the temple, constructedand decorated in the reign of Domitian

    54

    . A lengthy hymn, paralleled to a large extent by a similar hymn to Amun from the Ptah Tem-ple at Karnak, accompanies the scene of Domi-tian praising Amun.

    The whole article is : Domitianat the Contraa-temple of karnak. By David Klotz, and it is at http://www.academia.edu

    1. Thanks. I’d have to look more closely at the document you reference.

      I stand by my analysis of Atwill’s thesis – it is false. The gospel story is not based on Titus, and Josephus had nothing to do with writing any part of the New Testament.

      The Christ myth is founded upon religious and mythical ideas that had been floating around the Mediterranean and beyond for thousands of years. If you study my writings about the myths that evidently were used to create this astrotheological and solar myth, you will see what I am saying.

      Start here:

      http://truthbeknown.com

      You can also read my books:

      http://stellarhousepublishing.com

      I especially recommend Christ in Egypt: The Horus-Jesus Connection.

  2. …Correction, the article, written in English says, “good god” which is what you wrote Chretus meant, and what your new Book, Isis Chrestos, I am sure is at least, partially about.

    according to, I think Suetonius, Domitian hid in the temple of Isis, disguised as a priest of Isis to escape death or capture by one of the combatants(Vitallus), to the Roman, Emperorship, at war with his, Domitian’s, father, Vespasian.

    A plot, later used in a paragraph, right after the Testamonium Flavium in Joshephus’ works, to describe, an act of deception by the passion filled Decius Mundi, disguised as the God Anubis(an early Osirius figure, before, the latter god usurped him), to trick an unsuspecting women, into a night of pleasures, very reminiscent of the Mary, sex with the Holy spirit to conceive Jesus tale in the New testament.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

*

© 2015 Freethought Nation, Acharya S, D.M. Murdock & Stellar House Publishing
Skysa App Bar