Preface
The Holy Bible- according to the Christians is composed of:
1- The Old Testament which includes all the books revealed to Moses( peace be upon him) and all the prophets that came before Jesus( peace be upon him). There are some differnces between Christians sects when it comes to admitting some of these books.
2- The New Testament includes the four gospels admitted by their Clerical synod: Matthew, Mark, Luke, and June ( they did not admit the rest of the gospels) in addition to Acts that cites the actions of Paul who was a Jew who claimed to have heared Jesus in his was to Damascus after the elevation of the latter. Paul then started to preach for Jesus the Son of God. This paul is the one who distorted the Christian belief which was based on the oneness of Allah. After Acts are some messages sent to some towns, most of which were written by Paul.
Christians believe that all what is mentioned in the New Testament is revealed via the Holy Spirit. They also beilive that the Old Testament is filled with prophecies about Jesus and his deeds.
In this book, we have discussed them according to their beliefs especially what Peter mentions about Juda the traitor:" and his bishopric let another take" so that the number of disciples reaches twelve and this mentioning was considered a prophecy of what is cited in Psalms which state that the one crucified is Judas, n ot Jesus.
Also we have proved the credibility of Barnabas Gospel according to Galatians that refers to it, which proves its existence.
We have depended on what they mention in their Holy Book and their beliefs.
2
Introduction
The Truth Cited by the Qur'an about Jesus( Peace be upon him)
1- Jesus is not the Son of God :"Such is 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary). (It is) a statement of truth, about which they doubt (or dispute). It befits not (the Majesty of) Allah that He should beget a son [this refers to the slander of Christians against Allah, by saying that 'Iesa (Jesus) is the son of Allah]. Glorified (and Exalted be He above all that they associate with Him). When He decrees a thing, He only says to it, "Be!" and it is." (Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 19:34-35).
2- Neither is Jesus God: "Surely, they have disbelieved who say: "Allah is the Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)], son of Maryam (Mary)." But the Messiah ['Iesa (Jesus)] said: "O Children of Israel! Worship Allah, my Lord and your Lord." Verily, whosoever sets up partners in worship with Allah, then Allah has forbidden Paradise for him, and the Fire will be his abode. And for the Zalimun (polytheists and wrongdoers) there are no helpers."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 5:72)
3- He is not One of Three either:" Surely, disbelievers are those who said: "Allah is the third of the three (in a Trinity)." But there is no ilah (god) (none who has the right to be worshipped) but One Ilah (God -Allah). And if they cease not from what they say, verily, a painful torment will befall the disbelievers among them."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an: 5:73).
4- Jesus was not crucified because Allah has answered back the Jews who claimed to have crucified him:" and those who differ therein are full of doubts. They have no (certain) knowledge, they follow nothing but conjecture. For surely; they killed him not [i.e. 'Iesa (Jesus), son of Maryam (Mary) "(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 4: 157-158).
All these facts were crystal clear to the followers of Jesus who kept the Bible after him. Today's Christians',however, do not believe in this in spite of the clear proofs stating this from the Holy Book and from reason. They act as:" And when it is said to them (the Jews), "Believe in what Allah has sent down," they say, "We believe in what was sent down to us." And they disbelieve in that which came after it, while it is the truth confirming what is with them."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2:91)
They made the issue of crucifixion the axis upon which all their creed rotates since it was carried out to wipe away the sins of man. Other dogmas were built on this basis like the dogma of Trinity and Eucharist that proved fallacious in The Innocence Of Christ and His Virgin Honest Mother.
Behind all this distortion and misguidance was a person called Paul.
3
If Jesus was killed, the Qur'an would have clearly mentioned this since the Qur'an mentions the absolute truth with the extreme impartiality to any sect or religion:"Nay, you are but human beings, of those He has created, He forgives whom He wills and He punishes whom He wills. And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and all that is between them, and to Him is the return (of all). "(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 5:18).
It would be nothing weired if Jesus was killed because so many prophets were killed, which is stated in the Qur'an:" Say: "Verily, there came to you Messengers before me, with clear signs and even with what you speak of; why then did you kill them, if you are truthful?"(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 3:183), " ane every disbelieving nation plotted against their messenger to seize him"(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 40:5)," Is it that whenever there came to you a Messenger with what you yourselves desired not, you grew arrogant? Some, you disbelieved and some, you killed."(Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 87), and " Say (O Muhammad Peace be upon him to them): "Why then have you killed the Prophets of Allah aforetime, if you indeed have been believers?"" ( Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2: 91) in addition to what is mentioned in the Old Testament describing Jerusalem as the murderer of prophets.
4
The First Chapter
- The issue of Crucifixion: Who is the Crucified one?
- The one Crucified is Judas Ischariot according to the Old and New Testaments.
- Barnabas Bible: Qur'anic Proofs of its Credibility.
- Barnabas Bible: Proofs of its credibility from Glatians( the New Testament).
- Judas the Crucufied: Historical Statement.
5
The first Chapter
The issue of Crucifixion: Who is the Crucified one?
There are but two hypotheses:
1- Either the crucified one was Jesus- as the Christians cliam. In such case, Judas had a free life enjoying the reward of treason.
2- Or the one crucified was Judas Ischariot- as the Qur'an states- which is the whole truth after Allah had put Jesus' resemblance upon Judas and the Jews tried and crucified him. In such case Allah had saved him from treason and this Judas has no existence on the face of the earth.
What do the Old and New Testaments Mention about the one crucified?
1- it is stated in the New Testament that Peter says about Judah: “Men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus. For he was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry. Now this man purchased a field with the reward of iniquity, and falling headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all his bowels gushed out. And it was known unto all the dwellers at Jerusalem; insomuch as that field is called in their proper tongue, Aceldama, that is to say, The field of blood. For it is written in the book of Psalms, Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein: and his bishopric let another take.” (Acts: 16-20) .
2- As for the Old Testament: The Psalm referred to is psalm 109:“To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David. Hold not your peace, O God of my praise, For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred, and fought against me without a cause. For my love they are my adversaries: but I give myself unto prayer. And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my love. Set you a wicked man over him: and let Satan stand at his right hand. When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. Let his days be few; and let another take his office. Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow. Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places. Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor. Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children. Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be
6
blotted out. Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out. Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth. Because that he remembered not to show mercy, but persecuted the poor and needy man, that he might even slay the broken in heart. As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones. Let it be unto him as the garment which covereth him, and for a girdle wherewith he is girded continually. Let this be the reward of mine adversaries from the LORD, and of them that speak evil against my soul. But do thou for me, O GOD the Lord, for thy name's sake: because thy mercy is good, deliver thou me. For I am poor and needy, and my heart is wounded within me. I am gone like the shadow when it declineth: I am tossed up and down as the locust. My knees are weak through fasting; and my flesh faileth of fatness. I became also a reproach unto them: when they looked upon me they shaked their heads. Help me, O LORD my God: O' save me according to thy mercy: That they may know that this is thy hand; that thou, LORD, hast done it. Let them curse, but bless thou when they arise, let them be ashamed; but let thy servant rejoice. Let mine adversaries be clothed with shame, and let them cover themselves with their own confusion, as with a mantle. I will greatly praise the LORD with my mouth; yea, I will praise him among the multitude. For he shall stand at the right hand of the poor, to save him from those that condemn his soul. “ (Psalms: 109).
These are the texts mentionend about Judas Ischariot in both the Old and New Testaments. It can be seen that the one sentenced was Judas. Also Pslam 109: "As he loved cursing, so let it come unto him: as he delighted not in blessing, so let it be far from him. As he clothed himself with cursing like as with his garment, so let it come into his bowels like water, and like oil into his bones." confirms that the one crucufued is Judas in addition to Galatians 3:13" "Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree." ". This contradicts what Paul mentions that Christ has become a curse for our sake.
The psalm matches what Peter said about Judah. It confirms that the one tried was Juda since it says: “When he shall be judged, let him be condemned: and let his prayer become sin. … Let his days be few; and let another take his office …Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow” (Psalms: 109:7-9).
The Psalm then concludes with a prophecy about Christ and an account for his state when they wanted to seize him and God saved him by elevating him.
7
Who is Paul?
1- Lots of lying prophets( frauds) appeared just after the elevation of Christ- as the messages of the New Testament shows.
2- Paul was one of the disbelievers of Jesus who declared his persecution to the first generation of Christians. When it had become clear to him that this clear persecution is of no good, he decided to wear the mask of faith in order to destroy Christianity from within. He claimed that he saw a light on his way to Damascus and that Christ asked him: “Shaul, why do you persecute me?”. . He was then taken by Barnabas and got introduced to the rest of the followers.
3- Paul then stripped Christianity of its content except for four issues. He considered crucifixion the basis of all what he called for. If this creed falls, all that he calls for is refuted.
4- Modern and olfd Muslim scholars who studied this topic condemned this Paul completely like: - Imam El-Qurtoby who said to the Christians:" He distorted your religion for you and changed the true religion of Christ by allowing what Jesus had banned. That is why his jurisdictions found a fertile land among you." - Sheikh Abu El-Baka' Saleh Ibn El-Hosain El-Gaafary stated in embarrassing those who distorted the Bible:" This Paul stripped them of their religion through artful tricks when he saw their minds ready to grow all he had planted. In addition, this mean person distorted the Torah." - in Fetouh El-Sham for Abu Abd-Ellah El-Wakedy, Mokawkes the ruler of Egypt states in his speech:" Paul has misguided you and changed your beliefs and allowed you to commit was had been prohibited before. He told you to drink spirits, eat pork, and commit sins; Jesus could have never called for this." - Yokana- the son of the ruler of Aleppo wrote to his daughter:" A man called Paul misguided the Christians and made them deviate far away from truth. He was from amongst the Jews and allowed them the old disbelief."
8
Barnabas Gospel
1- Barnabas-according to his gospel- is an apostle of the twelve chosen by Jesus, or at least he was one of the preached second class messengers after the apostles in the life of Jesus. Acts (11:22) describes him as:" . He was then taken by Barnabas and got introduced to the rest of the followers."
2- This gospel first appeared after it had been discovered in 1709 (i.e. in the beginning of the Eighteenth Century). It was discovered by Craimer, one of the consultants of the Russian King when he was staying in Amesterdam . however, some scholars refer to the mid of the Fifteenth Centurey and the Sixteenth Century after the paper had been analyzed.
3- Dr. Khalil Sa'ada- who translated Barnabas Gospel into Arabic- refers to the fact there is another gospel that confirms Juda's crucifixion and condemns Paul:"Apparently there was a Bible called The Ignatius Bible, the drawings of which were effaced and traces lost. It starts and ends with a denunciation of Paul, and possibly that Bible is the origin of Barnabas'.) Dr. Sa'ada, who is Christian, is knowledgeable about some Bibles that were not accredited by the clerical synods and his words–mentioned earlier- prove the validity of Barnabas' Bible and the facts cited within.
4- Dr. Khalil Sa'ada stated in his introduction for the translation of Barnabas Bible how this gospel differs from the four approved gospels-as he argues- in four points: a- Jesus denied his divinity and his being Son of God. b- Ishmail was the one intended to be offered as a sacrifice by his father in the command of God, not Isac. c- The Awaited Messiah is not Jesus; it is Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). d- Jesus was lifted to heavens while the one crucified was Judas Ischariot.
5- This Bible is one of the old ones. It was mentioned in the books of the Second and Third Centuries. In other words, it was recorded 200 years before Messenger Muhammad(Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). It is mentioned in Tayseer Idhar El- Hak (p.517) " if it is claimed that Muslims got rid of this gospel after the appearance of the Prophet(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), it would be nonsense because Muslims did not care about the four gospels. Therefore, it would not be logical to turn to Barnabas Gospel. Also, it is really hard to believe that Msulims changed the versions of Barnabas Gospels that existed in Christian countires, churches, and libraries back then. The changes related to the prophecies of Messenger Muhammad ( peace and blessings of Allah be u[pon him) did not affect the scriptures existing there."
9
Qur'anic Proofs of Barnabas Bible Credibility
1- We have mentioned the fact that the truth about the crucufuxion of Judas Ischariot was known six centuries at least before the discovery of Barnabas Gospel. Also, Dr. Khalil Sa'ada refers to the fact there are other gospels that confirm this fact about his crucifixion which arfe in agreement with the Noble Qur'an and Baranabas Gospel.
2- The prophecy about the coming of Prophet Muhammad( peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) and that he is the Awaited Messiah. The Qur'an states: "Those to whom We gave the Scripture (Jews and Christians) recognise him (Muhammad SAW or the Ka'bah at Makkah) as they recongise their sons. But verily, a party of them conceal the truth while they know it - [i.e. the qualities of Muhammad SAW which are written in the Taurat (Torah) and the Injeel (Gospel)].” (Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 2:146). It is also narrated that Omar Ibn El Khattab once asked Abduallah Ibn Salam, a Jewish rabbi: “Do you know Muhammad as much as you know your own son?”. The latter replied: “I know him even better. The Honest (trustworthy) descended from Heaven to the Honest (trustworthy) on earth by his quality, so I recognized him. I do not doubt his being a prophet. As for my son, I can not tell what his mother might have done”. (Ibn Katheer: part I). Moreover, Jesus’ prophecy about Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and his name “Ahmad” as revealed in the holy verse “… and giving glad tidings of a messenger to come after me whose name shall be Ahmad” ( Meaning of the Noble Qur'an 61:6) was known to some Christians who lived during the time of prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Otherwise, they would have defied it then. Furthermore, the word “periclotus”, given by Christ as glad tidings to his followers, proved later to mean the praised one (Muhammad or Ahmad)
3- Priest Ceil mentions in his introduction to the translation of the meaning of the Qur'an a prophecy about the coming of Prophet Muhammad(peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in the Bible of Barnabas about the saying of Jesus:" Get acquainted -Barnabas- that God punishes for the sin even if it is a small one because God does not like sins. When my mother and disciples had loved me for the sake of the worldly life, Allah became angry and willed- through his justice- to punish them in this life for this offensive creed so that they are saved from Hell-fire. Eventhough I am innocent, when some people had called me God or Son of God, God hated this saying of them and his will ruled that devils do not laugh at me or mock me on the Day of Judgement, so He decided that mocking takes place in this worldly
10
life When Judas is crucified and everyone thinks I am on the cross. Nevertheless, this mockery shall remain until Muhammad, the Messenger of God, comes. When he comes to life, this doubt shall vanish and the mistake will be cleared." (This text is mentioned in Dr. Khalil Sa'da's translation p. 1206).
11
Barnabas Bible and the Galatians
The New Testament includes the four Gospels authenticated by the clerical synods: the Gospel of Matthew, the Gospel of Mark, the Gospel of Luke, and the Gospel of John. Next to these comes Acts, which is supposed to narrate what the apostles did after the resurrection of Christ. However, most of this book is dedicated to the works of Paul and Barnabas only. Then comes the Messages sent by Paul or others to some countries. Among these messages is the one sent by Paul to Galatia. This message includes a response to what is mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas; which in turn, confirms the existence of this Gospel back then.
In the beginning, Jerusalem Church sent Barnabas to Antioch to preach. Then, he brought Paul to Antioch to help him with preaching. They also shared preaching in other cities. According to Acts 15, Paul and Barnabas quarreled about who would accompany them on their journey. Barnabas wanted John, who is known as Mark, to accompany them, while Paul did not want him to do so. So, they disputed and each went on his own way. Barnabas took Mark and headed for Cyprus. Paul, on the other hand, chose Silas and went to Syria. Paul and Barnabas never met after the quarrel. After passing Galatia, Paul and his companion were prevented by the Holy Ghost from preaching in Asia. (It should be noted here that Galatia is in Asia).
One may wonder here how would both preachers have such a dispute over a companion after all the co-operation between them, especially when they were on their way to continue their missionary?! Or was there another reason each of whom mentioned individually: Barnabas in his gospel and Paul in his Message to the Galatians?!
. How come then there is a message to the people of Galatia while he was prevented from preaching there?! Considering things the way they are in Acts would mean that:
First: There is a certain fact that the writer of Acts wanted to hide that the dispute between Paul and Barnabas took place in Galatia, or why then would Paul criticize Barnabas in Galatia when they actually had left each other long before that.
Second: The dispute between Barnabas and Paul was because each of whom wanted a different companion and that does not mean attacking each other or ending up with a quarrel.
Third: It is mentioned in Acts that the Holy Ghost prevented the revelation in Asia, including Galatia, then how come Paul addressed his message to the people of this city?!
Actually, all the previously mentioned shows that there was a dispute
12
between Paul and Barnabas concerning the four issues mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas to which Paul had responded in his message to the Galatians. Meanwhile, the author of Acts wanted to hide this fact by saying that the Holy Ghost prevented the revelation in Asia, including Galatia. In order to completely hide this fact, those who determine Paul’s route during his journeys did not include Galatia in it.
Here is a map for the first and second journeys showing that Paul’s route did not include Galatia.
13
These charts are taken from the Holy Bible printed in Egypt Press under the number 977- 230-270-5, second version, first edition.
The issues mentioned in the Gospel of Barnabas to which Paul had responded:
Galatia starts by Paul's saying: “I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now persuade men, or God? Or do I seek to please men? For if yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ” (Galatians:1:6-10). He then said, “that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision. Only they would that we should remember the
14
poor; the same which I also was forward to do. But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed. For before that certain came from James, he did eat with the Gentiles: but when they were come, he withdrew and separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also was carried away with their dissimulation”. (Galatians: 2:9-13). In chapter 3 he said: “ O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you? “(Galatians: 3:1). Then, in the fourth chapter, he says: Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law? For it is written, that Abraham11 had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the ) other by a freewoman. But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise. Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which engendereth to bondage, which is Hagar. For this Hagar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children. But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. For it is written, Rejoice, thou barren that bearest not; break forth and cry, thou that travailest not; for the desolate hath many more children than she which hath a husband. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. But as5 then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now. Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman. So then, brethren, we are not children of the bondwoman, but of the free. “(Galatians: 4:21-31). As for the fifth chapter, it says: “Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.” (Galatians: 5:2)
Obviously, the previous texts tackled the following issues:
1- Reproaching the Galatians because they converted from the Gospel of Christ, the one preached by Paul, to another Gospel… which proves that there was another gospel to which Paul was responding. Then comes his attacking Peter and Barnabas and his saying that the latter followed their hypocrisy, as a proof that the other gospel is the Gospel of Barnabas. Moreover, according to the route mentioned in Acts, Barnabas was not in Galatia which confirms the fallacy of the points mentioned in Acts.
2- The second dispute was over the fact that Paul made Jesus a god and makes himself a slave to Jesus while people refuse this. Who are these people? Are not they the disciples of Jesus?
3- Barnabas said in the beginning of his gospel:" Barnabas, Jesus Nazarene's apostle, wishes you all, people on Earth, peace and console. Dear people, God The Great has sent His prophet Jesus as a mercy with guidance and
15
signs to correct Satan's misguidance in the name of piety: spreading highly atheist teachings, dubbing Jesus the son of God, refraining from circumcision which God has always called for and legalizing defile meat. Those are Satan's followers among whom is as Paul about whom I talk with the utmost sorrow and who is the reason why I am writing the truth I have seen and heard while being with Jesus to be guided and escape Satan's deception and God's hell. So, beware those who spread any teachings incompatible with what I told you so that you would survive. May God be with you and protect you from Satan and all his evils, Amen"
4- If we add up to Paul's alleged vision hiss saying: "….I did not consult any man. Nor did I go up to Jerusalem to see those who were apostles before I was, but I went immediately to Arabia and later returned to Damascus. Then after three years, I went up to Jerusalem to get acquainted with Peter." (Galatians 1:16-18), and also his say: "Fourteen years later I went up again to Jerusalem, this time with Barnabas.." (Galatians 2:1), we would know that Paul's teachings are but his own words and taken neither from Jesus nor from his apostles.
5- The third point of dispute is that the son whom Abraham was willing to sacrifice was actually Ishmael not Isaac and that the foretold Messiah is not Jesus but Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Paul had tackled this issue in (Galatians 4/ 21:31) as mentioned before. The question now is: What's the reason of including this story with such magnitude and exaggeration? The most prominent part of this story is his attack on those who wanted to follow the revelation (which came down upon them and him) and the Jews twisted the facts so that the one meant becomes Isaac not Ishmael. Here, Paul's attack on those people shows that they were telling the truth about the person sacrificed, being Ishmael not Isaac, and about the awaited Messiah being Muhammad (Peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), or else, what would be the reason behind reporting the story of Hagar and Sarah in his message to the Galatians and attacking Hagar and her offspring? Paul –in his preaching- or rather, his misguidance- claims equality between the Israelites and the other nations in accepting the "grace" of Christ's crucifixion. Then, why would he attack Hagar and her offspring saying that "this Hagar is Mount Sinai in Arabia." Whereas " But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all. Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise. "? Then he digresses: (But what the book says is: Send away the bondwoman and her son, for the son of the bondwoman is not to inherit as the son of the freewoman. Then brothers, we are the sons of the freewoman, not the bondwoman.) First, had they been the words of Sarah as the book says, that wouldn't have been considered revelation anyway. Nevertheless, doesn't the offspring of the bondwoman
16
belong also that of Abraham? So it should be better than other nations at least in that respect. Accordingly, if he was the one carrying glad tidings to nations, why didn't he include Hagar and her offspring among them? In fact, that matter, for both Paul and the Jews –to whom he belongs- is too dangerous to neglect especially because of his malice and the Jews' knowing that the awaited Messiah is the offspring of Hagar. The Jewish conspiracy this time against Christianity was embodied in Paul's attempts to distort Christianity by getting rid of the truth about Ishmael and that the Messiah is his offspring. Maybe that's the reason why the Jews asked for crucifying Christ when he told them that the awaited Messiah is Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). (See the chapter: The awaited Messiah is Muhammad).
6- The fourth point of dispute is about circumcision which the latter claimed unnecessary or rather refused.
7- The fifth point of dispute between Barnabas and Paul is the issue of crucifixion. Barnabas believes that Jesus was not crucified, but Judas was; he was made to appear like Jesus, captured, humiliated, tried and crucified. Jesus was not crucified, but was raised up to God. Paul's response to this dispute was very clear in his message to the Galatians and was violent, exaggerated and fanatic as well; he believed that the issue of crucifixion is the core of the faith he preaches and once it collapses, the whole Christian creed collapses as well. The nullity of the doctrine of crucifixion has already been clarified (there is a chapter compiled under that thesis), but what is more important now is how Paul responded to Barnabas regarding that issue in (Galatians 3:1). He says: "You foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you? Before your very eyes Jesus Christ was clearly portrayed as crucified." Isn't it clear now after his violent description of the Galatians as foolish and bewitched that the Bible he attacked earlier revealed to the Galatians that Jesus was not crucified and they believed in that?! Surprisingly, moreover, Paul went too far telling them that Jesus' crucifixion occurred in front of their eyes. So now where is that place –Galatia- in Turkey recently? How far it is from Jerusalem where the crucifixion of Christ actually took place!
All the above mentioned confirms that Jesus was not crucified and shows the validity of Barnabas' Bible with all the facts that came in it, those which made Paul reply. And the act of replying proves the existence of Barnabas' Bible from the early days of Christianity.
17
Judas the Crucified: Historical Statement
A lot of explanatory books interpret the Qur'anic verse: "but a resemblance of him was presented to them..", using a lot of explanations which never came in neither the Qur'an nor the prophet's Sunna; that's why these are considered attempts from the compilers to clarify how this resemblance was presented. Also, some of these attempts were made by some Christians who either embraced Islam afterwards or not.
1- Among the attempts made to explain this resemblance is that of Imam Al-Tabari, died in the 9th century, "Some Christians claim that Youdes Zachariah Yota is the one who was likened for them thus was crucified. So he said: 'I am not him; I am the one who helped you seize him.'".
2- Al-Zamakhshari, died in the 11th century, however, explained it saying: (It was said that a man was hypocrite to Jesus, and when the latter was to be killed, that hypocrite offered to show them the way to capture Jesus. So he went to Jesus' house but was likened to Jesus and captured instead. People then had a dispute and asked: "if that's Jesus, then where is our companion. And if that's our companion, then where is Jesus?"
3- Then Ibn Katheer,died in the 13th century, explained the same verse saying: "Some Christians believe that Youdes Zachariah Youhana, Judas, was the one made to appear like Jesus, so they crucified him while he was screaming: "I am not him; I am the one who lead you to him."
All these explanations were mentioned by Christians starting from the 9th until the 13th century and all of them prove that the one crucified was Judas the traitor. In addition, all these explanations had appeared before Barnabas' gospel, the one stating that Judah was the one crucified, came out to light in 1709 – at the beginning of the 18th century. However, some scientists believe that the first version of Barnabas' Bible dates back to the middle of the 15th century or the 16th century.
Hence, comparing the previous dates will make it clear that some Christians since the 9th century did believe that the one crucified was Judas the traitor and that happened at least 6 centuries before the appearance of Barnabas' Bible. That means that crucifying Judas was already known along with those facts about Judah's resemblance to Jesus, and again that confirms the existence of Barnabas' Bible and other Bibles as well stating Judah's crucifixion.
18
The Second chapter
How and Why He was Tried and Crucified
- The Trial of Judas The Traitor.
- The Incidents of the Arrest.
- The Incidents of the Trial.
- The Reasons.
19
The Second chapter
How and Why He was Tried and Crucified
The Trial of Judas Ischariot
The Trial of Judas
First of all, it is worthy mentioning that Judas, since the arrest of the one to be crucified, trial and crucifixion, disappeared totally from the city. That incident was justified as: he regretted what he did, so he went to the temple, gave the bribe (thirty pieces of silver) and then hung himself. Another story says that he fell and "all his intestines spilled out."
From the texts that narrate, one that says: "Early in the morning, all the chief priests and the elders of the people came to the decision to put Jesus to death. They bound him, led him away and handed him over to Pilate, the governor. When Judas, who had betrayed him, saw that Jesus was condemned, he was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders. "I have sinned", he said, "For I have betrayed innocent blood." "What is that to us?" they replied. "That's your responsibility." So Judas threw the money into the temple and left. Then he went away and hanged himself. The chief priests picked up the coins and said, "It is against the law to put this into the treasury, since it is blood money." So they decided to use the money to buy the potter's field as a burial place for foreigners. That' is why it has been called the Field of Blood to this day. Then what was spoken by Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled: "They took the thirty silver coins, the price set on him by the people of Israel, and they used them to buy the potter's field, as the Lord commanded me." Matthew (27/1-10)
Another text in (Acts) says: "Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled which the Holy Spirit spoke long ago through the mouth of David concerning Judah, who served as guide for those who arrested Jesus- he was one of our number and shared in this ministry." "With the reward he got for his wickedness, Judas bought a field; there he fell headlong, his body burst open and all his intestines spilled out. Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is Field of Blood." "For," said Peter, "it is written in the book of Psalms, 'May his place be destroyed; let there be no one to dwell in it,' and, 'May another take his place of leadership'(1/16-20)
In both texts, there is a feigned excuse for the disappearance of Judas; that's why the two prove to be inconsistent. By means of comparison between the two texts, it would be clear that in Matthew, Judas regretted and returned the thirty
20
silver coins to the chief priests and the elders, the incident which was not mentioned at all in Acts, also in Matthew Judas was said to have thrown the silver in the temple and left.
Though in Acts, Judas brought a field as a reward for his wickedness, in Matthew it was mentioned that the chief priests were the ones who bought the potter's field.
Even in the way he died, still the difference goes on between the two texts: in Matthew he hanged himself, whereas in Acts he fell and "his intestines spilled out."
Judas the traitor disappeared and contradictory stories were made up to justify his disappearance while at that time he was the one sued in front of the chief priests; the situation which ended with his crucifixion.
The incidents of arresting the one to be crucified
"Then he returned to his disciples and said to them, "Are you still sleeping and resting? Look, the hour is near, and the Son of Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners. Rise, let us go! Here comes my betrayer!" While he was still speaking, Judas, one of the twelve, arrived. With him was a large crowd armed with swords and clubs, sent from the chief priests and the elders of the people. Now the betrayer had arranged a signal with them: "The one I kiss is the man; arrest him." Going at once to Jesus, Judas said, "Greetings, Rabbi!" and kissed him. Jesus replied, "Friends, do what you came for." Then the men stepped forward, seized Jesus and arrested him." (Matthew 26:45-50)
However, Luke (21:37-38) narrates: "Each day Jesus was teaching at the temple, and each evening he went out to spend the night on the hill called the Mount of Olives, and all the people came early in the morning to hear him at the temple."
Luke 22 begins with: "Now the Feast of unleavened bread, called the Passover, was approaching, and the chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some way to get rid of Jesus, for they were afraid of the people. Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests and the officers of the temple guard and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus. They were delighted and agreed to give him money. He consented, and watched for an opportunity to hand Jesus over to them when no crowd was present." (22:1-6).Later in the same chapter: "While he (Jesus) was still speaking a crowd came up, and the man who was called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, but Jesus asked him, "Judas, are you betraying the Son of Man with a kiss?" When Jesus' followers saw what was going to happen, they said, "Lord, should
21
we strike with our swords?" And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. But Jesus answered, "No more of this!" And he touched the man's ear and healed him. Then Jesus said to the chief priests, the officers of the temple guard, and the elders, who had come for him, "Am I leading a rebellion, that you have come with swords and clubs? Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me. But this is your hour-when darkness reigns." (Luke:22:47-53)
Now in (John): (When he had finished praying, Jesus left with his disciples and crossed the Kidron Valley. On the other side there was an olive grove, and he and his disciples went into it. Now, Judas, who betrayed him, knew the place, because Jesus had often met there with his disciples. So Judas came to the grove, guiding a detachment of soldiers and some officials from the chief priests and Pharisees. They were carrying torches, lanterns and weapons. Jesus, knowing all that was going to happen to him, went out and asked them, "Who is it you want?" "Jesus of Nazareth," they replied. "I am he," Jesus said. "And Judas the traitor was standing there with them. When Jesus said, "I am he," they drew back and fell to the ground. Again he asked them, "Who is it you want?" And they said, "Jesus of Nazareth." "I told you that I am he," Jesus answered. "If you are looking for me, then let these men go." (John: 18:1-8)
And in the same chapter: "Then the detachment of soldiers with its commander and the Jewish officials arrested Jesus. They bound him and brought him first to Annas"
Viewing these stories of arresting Jesus (as Bibles claim) one can find it impossible to put these facts together or see any resemblance. It's worth saying here that the aim now is not to highlight differences and distortion in the Old and New Testaments, as it is a matter of fact by now, but the aim is to show that one story was deliberately distorted to indicate that Jesus was the one sued and crucified not Judas.
And that is all consistent as Luke then Matthew and Mark compiled their Bibles with the help of Paul's followers not the help of Jesus' apostles.
Here is the analysis of the previous stories:
First: It is impossible for the chief priests and the Pharisees not to recognize Jesus after all his deeds: as bringing the dead to life, healing the ill, feeding five thousand with some bread and fish in addition to his constant teaching in the temple in front of the Jews, priests, Pharisees and others. And according to Luke's Bible (22:53), Jesus said to them: "Every day I was with you in the temple courts, and you did not lay a hand on me." Also, as mentioned in (Luke 37) "Each day Jesus was teaching at the temple, and each evening he went out to
22
spend the night on the hill called the Mount of Olives, and all the people came early in the morning to hear him at the temple."
So, after all this, do the chief priests still need to be guided to Jesus by Judas' kiss to him? Then by taking a look at verse 19 in Luke (20) which says that the chief priests wanted to arrest him so they watched him and sent spies seemingly pious. From all the previously mentioned facts, it can be concluded that Jesus did not use to sleep in the town but in the Mount of Olives; away from people, in a place not known for the priests or for the Pharisees. Thus, Judas' betrayal was not by making them recognize Jesus with the kiss but was to show them his place (Luke 22/1:6). That's because they didn't know the place while he did since it was the place where Jesus met his disciples (John 18:2). And it seems that the place was dark and that's why they took torches and lanterns with them (John 18:3).
Judah's treachery lies in getting them to know the place where Jesus resides; there was no kiss whatsoever. When they entered, Judah was made to appear like Jesus, consequently, he was arrested, tried and crucified. The issue of the kiss was mentioned to allegedly prove that Jesus was the one crucified; Judah remained and Jesus was arrested. And in order to fake this incident, a story of Judah's death is made up. He died and only Jesus remained to meet his doom embodied in ten horrendous crimes each of which is worse than the other. There is no problem whatsoever to have had the son of God crucified and insulted in a way that doesn't suit his glory; all is for the sake of the doctrines of Crucifixion and Redemption.
According to the incidents mentioned in the four gospels, Christ was stripped of his clothes, of which every soldier took his share, (Mark 15:24). This means that Christ was naked when crucified. Was that meant to be a public scandal??!! May be the act of stripping in itself is enough to prove that the one crucified is Judah, the one who is worthy of such a flagrant insult. Such a fact can not be accepted by Paul and his disciples. There was only one person crucified and Judah disappeared completely, so a story is contrived, the way previously shown, to justify his disappearance.
The Trial
"Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, and said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. And the high priest arose, and said unto him, Answerest thou nothing? what is it which these witness against thee? But Jesus held his peace.
23
And the high priest answered and said unto him, I adjure thee by the living God, that thou tell us whether thou be the Christ, the Son of God. Jesus saith unto him, Thou hast said: nevertheless I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven. Then the high priest rent his clothes, saying, He hath spoken blasphemy; what further need have we of witnesses? behold, now ye have heard his blasphemy. What think ye? They answered and said, He is guilty of death." (Matthew 26: 59-66)
In Matthew 27, "they led the Christ away, and delivered him to Pontius Pilate the governor. And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest. And when he was accused of the chief priests and elders, he answered nothing. Then said Pilate unto him, Hearest thou not how many things they witness against thee? And he answered him to never a word; insomuch that the governor marvelled greatly."
Mark's narration almost reconciles with that of Matthew until the part in which the chief priest asked". According to Luke (22:66), the story goes like, "And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the chief priests and the scribes came together, and led him into their council, saying, Art thou the Christ? tell us. And he said unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go. Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of the power of God. Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am. And they said, what need we any further witness? for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth." And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto Pilate. And they began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Caesar, saying that he himself is Christ a King. And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it. Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people, I find no fault in this man. And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from Galilee to this place. When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the man were a Galilaean. And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto Herod's jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself also was at Jerusalem at that time. And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad: for he was desirous to see him of a long season, because he had heard many things of him; and he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him. Then he questioned with him in many words; but he answered him nothing. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently accused him. And Herod with his men of war set him at nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous robe, and sent him again to Pilate. And the
24
same day Pilate and Herod were made friends together: for before they were at enmity between themselves. And Pilate, when he had called together the chief priests and the rulers and the people, Said unto them, Ye have brought this man unto me, as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, I, having examined him before you, have found no fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him: No, nor yet Herod: for I sent you to him; and, lo, nothing worthy of death is done unto him. I will therefore chastise him, and release him." (Luke 23:1-6)
As for the story cited in John, it is completely different from the stories narrated in Matthew's, Mark's, and Luke's. According to John (18:1:9), "When Jesus had spoken these words, he went forth with his disciples over the brook Cedron, where was a garden, into the which he entered, and his disciples. And Judas also, which betrayed him, knew the place: for Jesus ofttimes resorted thither with his disciples. Judas then, having received a band of men and officers from the chief priests and Pharisees, cometh thither with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jesus therefore, knowing all things that should come upon him, went forth, and said unto them, Whom seek ye? They answered him, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus saith unto them, I am he. And Judas also, which betrayed him, stood with them. As soon then as he had said unto them, I am he, they went backward, and fell to the ground. Then asked he them again, Whom seek ye? And they said, Jesus of Nazareth. Jesus answered, I have told you that I am he: if therefore ye seek me, let these go their way: That the saying might be fulfilled, which he spake, Of them which thou gavest me have I lost none. " In the same chapter(John 18:12-14), "Then the band and the captain and officers of the Jews took Jesus, and bound him, And led him away to Annas first; for he was father in law to Caiaphas, which was the high priest that same year. Now Caiaphas was he, which gave counsel to the Jews, that it was expedient that one man should die for the people."
"The high priest then asked Jesus of his disciples, and of his doctrine. Jesus answered him, I spake openly to the world; I ever taught in the synagogue, and in the temple, whither the Jews always resort; and in secret have I said nothing. Why askest thou me? ask them which heard me, what I have said unto them: behold, they know what I said. And when he had thus spoken, one of the officers which stood by struck Jesus with the palm of his hand, saying, Answerest thou the high priest so? Jesus answered him, If I have spoken evil, bear witness of the evil: but if well, why smitest thou me? Now Annas had sent him bound unto Caiaphas the high priest." John(18:19-24) In the same chapter, "Then led they Jesus from Caiaphas. Pilate then went out unto them, and said, what accusation bring ye against this man? They answered and said unto him, if he were not a malefactor, we would not have delivered him up unto thee (Notice
25
that they did not charge him with or accuse him of any crimes). Then said Pilate unto them, Take ye him, and judge him according to your law. The Jews therefore said unto him, It is not lawful for us to put any man to death: That the saying of Jesus might be fulfilled, which he spake, signifying what death he should die. Then Pilate entered into the judgment hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews? Jesus answered him, Sayest thou this thing of thyself, or did others tell it thee of me? Pilate answered, Am I a Jew? Thine own nation and the chief priests have delivered thee unto me: what hast thou done? Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of the truth heareth my voice. Pilate saith unto him, What is truth? And when he had said this, he went out again unto the Jews, and saith unto them, I find in him no fault at all. But ye have a custom, that I should release unto you one at the passover: will ye therefore that I release unto you the King of the Jews?" "Then Pilate therefore took Jesus, and scourged him. And the soldiers platted a crown of thorns, and put it on his head, and they put on him a purple robe, And said, Hail, King of the Jews! and they smote him with their hands. Pilate therefore went forth again, and saith unto them, Behold, I bring him forth to you, that ye may know that I find no fault in him. Then came Jesus forth, wearing the crown of thorns, and the purple robe. And Pilate saith unto them, Behold the man! When the chief priests therefore and officers saw him, they cried out, saying, Crucify him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Take ye him, and crucify him: for I find no fault in him. The Jews answered him, We have a law, and by our law he ought to die, because he made himself the Son of God. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he was the more afraid; And went again into the judgment hall, and saith unto Jesus, Whence art thou? But Jesus gave him no answer. Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. And from thenceforth Pilate sought to release him: but the Jews cried out, saying, If thou let this man go, thou art not Caesar's friend: whosoever maketh himself a king speaketh against Caesar. When Pilate therefore heard that saying, he brought Jesus forth, and sat down in the judgment seat in a place that is called the Pavement, but in the Hebrew, Gabbatha. And it was the preparation of the passover, and about the sixth hour: and he saith unto the Jews, Behold your King! But they cried out, Away with him, away with him, crucify him. Pilate saith unto them, Shall I
26
crucify your King? The chief priests answered, We have no king but Caesar. Then delivered he him therefore unto them to be crucified. And they took Jesus, and led him away." John (19:1-16)
After presenting the story of Jesus' trial the way it is mentioned in the four gospels, and after showing the obvious discrepancy between what is mentioned in the gospels of Luke, Matthew and Mark on the one hand and that of John on the other, one can be sure of the fact that these gospels are indeed fabrications contrived according to the viewpoints of those who wrote them. Only God knows what was written in those gospels denounced by the clerical synod including that of Barnabas, which was proven to be authentic according to what was mentioned in Paul's message to the Galatians.
The following is an examination of what was mentioned in the four gospels in order to show that the one crucified is Judah, not Jesus. According to the gospels of Mark, Matthew and Luke, the first thing to be noticed when it comes to the answers of the crucified is that he was saying "Ye say", for, when he was tried, the archbishops asked "Art thou the Christ? Tell us. And he said unto them, if I tell you, ye will not believe: and if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let me go." "Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God? And he said unto them, Ye say that I am." Luke's version along with the aforementioned answers complement what was mentioned in Barnabas's gospel- denounced by the majority of Christians, stating that the one crucified before the archbishops was Judah the traitor. According to Luke, he says, in response to their question "Ye say that I am." Thus, it's understandable that the archbishops insisted that he, Judah, was Jesus, despite the former's insistence that he is not. Such an answer is actually a denial of what is implied in the question "And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of the Jews? And he answered him and said, Thou sayest it." It's also obvious that Jesus did not claim to be the king of the Jews, so "Ye say" is also a denial of that. The same goes for each time the crucified says" Ye say". It's also worth mentioning that Jesus always "showed himself" without being asked to, as stated in John that he was once talking to " a woman of Samaria"; "The woman saith unto him, I know that Messiah cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things.";"Jesus saith unto her, I that speak unto thee am he." So, if Jesus did that before, why would not he in a situation regarded as a core belief for those who uphold the doctrines of crucifixion and redemption?!!
(NB. We are only analyzing what is narrated in the four gospels to refute the allegations of their writers, as we surely believe that the coming Messiah is Muhammad- peace and blessings be upon him.)
As for the Gospel of John, there is no doubt that it was written after the
27
clerical synod had settled on the desired creeds. It was the only gospel to start with "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." to include the sentence " God So Loved the World" and to mention resurrecting Lazarus. Moreover, it was the gospel that leveled Cai'aphas, the high priest who tried the one crucified, to the status of a prophet. " And one of them, named Cai'aphas, being the high priest that same year, said unto them, (i.e the Pharisees) Ye know nothing at all, nor consider that it is expedient for us, that one man should die for the people, and that the whole nation perish not. And this spake he not of himself: but being high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation; and not for that nation only, but that he should also gather together in one the children of God that were scattered abroad." (John 11:49-52) Therefore, if Cai'aphas did believe in such issues of crucifixion and redemption, why did he try the crucified and allow his insult??
Obviously, the doctrines of crucifixion and redemption appeared after Jesus was raised to heaven, for his disciples didn’t know anything about such doctrines before. And one may wonder, provided that such creeds were core Christian beliefs, why did not Jesus expound on them given they are the most fundamental parts of his message to this universe? How is this possible when his disciples, those who are supposed to spread his message after him, did not know anything about them?! According to the gospels, after the burial, some women went to the grave with some sweet spices on Sunday. This is the first evidence they knew nothing about resurrection. In fact, when they told the apostles about the Christ's resurrection, their "words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not. Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that which was come to pass." Luke [24:11-12] "And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. But they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit.", Luke [24:37] "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead," John [20:9]
All these aforementioned texts are satisfactory evidence that the disciples did not know anything about resurrection. Is it possible that the crucified, alleged to be Jesus Christ, let his disciples run into confusion knowing nothing neither about their main belief nor the most important events for which he was mainly sent while high priest Caiaphas knew all that?!
All what is mentioned in the gospels about the Christ's crucifixion and resurrection which his disciples knew nothing about, not to mention that it is said that after his resurrection, the Christ taught his disciples about his core belief, is fabricated and contrived in order to validate and corroborate the
28
doctrines of crucifixion and redemption. According to Mark [9/30] and [10/32], he told them about his death and resurrection. However, they knew nothing about that according to Luke and John. Each one wrote what occurred to him leading to such contradictions and discrepancies. Allah says in His Noble Quran, "Do they not consider the Quran? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy." (Meaning of the Noble Quran 4:82)
As for the alleged prophecies about crucifixion and the trial, the one crucified and tried was Judas Iscariot while Jesus Christ (Peace be upon him) was rescued by Allah according to Psalm 109. Did these prophecies include how the crucified had been insulted before crucifixion?! Was it mentioned that the Son of God who, according to the Christian beliefs, is the Word of God from Whom he cannot split was to be insulted?!(Exalted be He)
When we move away from Jesus Christ's disciples who were ignorant of crucifixion and resurrection to his immediate family, we find out that:
First: His Mother: An angel said to his Virgin Mother Mary, bringing the glad tidings of his birth, "And, beholds, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS. He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest: and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever" Luke [1/32]. Did Mary discern after receiving this piece of glad tidings that her son was to be arrested, insulted, and crucified?!
Second: Zachariah (Peace be upon him): In Luke's gospel, it is related that Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost after his son John the Baptist had been delivered, and he prophesied saying," Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people, And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David; As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began: That we should be saved from our enemies, and from the hand of all that hate us" Luke [1/67]. According to Zacharias' words, it is crystal clear that redemption means being saved from enemies and those who hold hatred in their hearts. They do not have any reference to the alleged crucifixion and redemption doctrines. This is a further emphasis that the word redemption refers to redeeming the people of Israel from their enemies, not redeeming mankind from their sins. This is what two apostles who were heading to a village called Emmaus said three days after crucifixion. They told him, though they did not know him, that he was to redeem Israel, L:uke [24/21].
Third: His brethren: In John(7: 3-5), it is related that " His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see
