Well said and a great post.<quoted text>
OH, now it is a "Christian Convert to Islam"? So the "Blame" has to be shared between Islam and Christianity?
Or may be first he was a Jew, then he converted to Christianity and then he converted to Islam?
Who knows when "experts" get on the tail, they can "discover and prove anything"!!
The ONLY thing these "experts" do not agree upon is the Truth!!
Why Barnabas should not write a Gospel, I do not know. he was there with Disciples since the very beginning. he fell out with Paul, so he must have some differences with him.
And these differences were not "why you take red pencil from my cupboard type"....they were deep theological differences.
So it is very "logical" for Barnabas to put his side of the story.
And it had to be different from Paul's views that is also certain.
And the Church is against this Gospel that is also certain.
Enjoyed reading your brilliant and helpful post, MUQ and I agree with that.
Barnabas was the one, who had asked the elders to grant fellow-ship to Paul and that is how both became friends.
The split between Barnabas and Paul is quite clear in Acts 15:36-41 and you will be surprised to know that the same Paul, who opposed Mark's choice, considered him useless, asked Timothy the following, after Barnabas was out:
"Only Luke is with me. Get Mark and bring him with you, because he is helpful to me in my ministry."
And see what Paul wrote in Colossians:
"My fellow prisoner Aristarchus sends you his greetings, as does Mark, the cousin of Barnabas.(You have received instructions about him; if he comes to you, welcome him.) "
Barnabas out, Mark in again!
So, Paul used Mark as he had no real knowledge.
As for the Church, Paul's lies had already been accepted and established. There was no way the Church could kick Paul out and bring back Barnabas. So, Barnabas was erased.
I believe that there were serious differences between Paul and Barnabas. Barnabas sat in the company of Jesus, Paul did not.