From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography (Rated Start-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
WikiProject Saints (Rated Start-class, Top-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Saints, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Saints and other individuals commemorated in Christian liturgical calendars on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Top  This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.


I have removed a comment on the alleged reason for Paul wanting to rid gentiles of the circumcision requirement (, realizing that Christianity would never reach large numbers of gentiles if circumcision were required.[1]), since this represents speculative inference on Pauls hidden reasons for having this view, he himself would probably have given as reason for this his own arguing in his letters. The comments purpose is to create a bias towards Pauls driving force, and is as such not neutral. jsvens 10:00, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

I've removed some vandalism done by earlier today. 3 edits - changed "nerd" back to "prophet", "demon of Hell" back to "good man" and removed a reference to Wikipedia after "...discrepant and untrustworthy." (Didn't sign in) ColinCameron 22:05, 22 October 2006 (UTC)

What is the basis for the "written by a 14th century Italian" claim regarding the Barnabas gospel? I'm 3/4's through reading the document's text, and it seems to me to offer, underneath the Muslim polemical overlay, strong evidences throughout in various categories of some original authenticity. I could believe it had passed through 14th century Italian hands, particularly in light of the original Catholic church's proscriptions on its possession, and Islamic text interpolations seem abundantly evident, but I see no grounds yet for the argument the entire thing is a medieval fabrication in toto. Chris Rodgers 05:12, 25 Aug 2004 (UTC)

This article seems to be very biased against Pauline and trinitarian theology. It needs to be made more neutral. - 08:50, 31 Dec 2004 (UTC)


Author of the article: “His Hellenic Jewish parents called him…”

Where did you get that from? There was nothing “Hellenic” about him!

Acts 4:36, from multiple versions of the bible…

… Barnabas was 100% Cypriot. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 01:01, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikifying in progress[edit]

I am Wikifying this article and it's a big job. Some copy editing of parts appears necessary too.

I agree that this article is pretty polemical in tone. Needs a NPOV. (If I ever get time...). Peter Hitchmough 07:46, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Copyright violation[edit]

I'm sorry I had to do this, but the evidence is undeniable.

I was suspicious of several section of this article, namely "Teachings of Barnabas", "History Reference", & "Barnabas and Teachings of Islam". My original intent was mark these sections as needing either to be verified or purged of original research, but when I started to edit, I could tell from the formating of the text that it had been a cut-&-pasted from another source. Searching for the phrase "followers of Barnabas never developed a central" on Google returned the page on as the first hit. (It was added by an anonymous editor on 6 Dec 2004.)

I'm putting the version previous to that one at Barnabas/temp, so Peter can work on that one & not this embarassment. (And it is, in more than one way: much of the anti-Pauline material comes from that URL.) -- llywrch 20:57, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Sadly, I support your findings. I shall not be doing any more wiki/copy-editing work on this for now. I have nothing to add to a rewrite. Maybe I will return later.
Peter Hitchmough 23:12, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Thanks, Llywrch, for sorting this article out. I didn't know where to start with what we had before. I'll see if I can do a bit of an edit here, to tidy up and expand. Barnabas is called αποστολος in the Greek texts. It is non-controversial that English NTs translate this apostle: the interesting thing is that he and Paul (and others less well documented) broaden the church's understanding of apostleship to include those who were not the Twelve, or replacements for them. Gareth Hughes 12:25, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Joses and Nabas[edit]

In this article, as well as others, the name Joses (Yoses) is presented as being the Aramaic version of Joseph (Yousef), but it is unlikely that the Aramaic version had an /s/ at its end, this being rather the Greek version of the Aramaic version. I think there are modern Israeli persons having the name Yosi which could be more likely the Aramaic version. Like wise, a proposed explanation for the etymology of Barnabas is that it is comprised of Aramaic Bar (=son of) and Nabas (==prophet). Nabas seems also to be the Graecised version of Naba (as in Arabic Nabi). --Alif 13:42, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

Luke as the author of Luke and Acts[edit]

The article claimed that the scholarly consensus is that Luke wrote Luke and Acts. I think there is unquestionably a scholarly consensus that the author of Luke and Acts is the same person. I question whether there is a scholarly consensus that Luke wrote Luke. At least it is disputed area. I hesitated to make a change in this article since I am sure others are more versed in the topic than I am. I won't object to a reversion if it is felt that is desirable. Thanks Davefoc 05:03, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Double vandalisms[edit]

I just made the foolish error of restoring version 1 of a doubly entered vandalism: not cautious enoiugh in using the rollback feature. --Wetman 16:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Original Greek MSS?[edit]

Is there an original Greek copy of his writings? Surely we ought not to settle for a mere Latin translation in this day and age? (Weirpwoer 04:17, 30 August 2007 (UTC)).

alleged writings[edit]

There is plenty of reference material for the Muslim claim that Mohammad appears in the Gospel of Barnabas. Here is but one of them: Eugene-elgato (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

With all due respect, anybody can write anything. I could change this article to say that Barnabas was the Apostle to Mars and, like that example, the idea is ridiculous for a very simple reason. Barnabas lived in the First Century and Mohammad in Seventh Century. Thus he could hardly have been known to a Christian missionary 600 years before he was born!
PainMan (talk) 01:28, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Changed version of name from Classical Greek to Koine[edit]

I changed the Greek form of Barnabas' name from the incorrect Classical Greek form to the dialect actually used by the common people of the eastern Roman Empire, the Koine, or (Koine Greek: [kɔɪˈnɛ]).

Koine incorporated so many foreign elements and "corruptions" of Classical Greek vocabulary and grammar that it was a very different language from the rareified Classical Greek used by scholars and the ruling classes of the Empire. To be considered educated in the late Republic and Empire, a Roman man had to speak Classical Greek as fluently as he spoke Latin.

It is somewhat analogous to the situation today: people all over the world learn English in order to be able to communicate with each foreingers. And in polyglot societies like India, for example, speaking English is absolutely necessary in order to move ahead in that country--as well as maintain civil peace. Koine and English avoid(ed) linguistic chauvinism, because it is completely foreign to the sub-continent much as Latin was to the peoples of the east (roughly all of the Empire east and southeast of Italy.

PainMan (talk) 01:23, 10 September 2010 (UTC)


The article includes this sentence:

"Martyred at Salamis, Cyprus, in AD 61 [2], he is traditionally identified as the founder of the Cypriot Church."

It is stated in many Internet articles on Barnabas that he was stoned to death in Salonica (presumably the city in Greece). There are also references to the fact that there is a legend that he was martyred in Salamis, Cyprus on the internet and that his tomb is near the Monastery of St. Barnabas. However, with regard to all these claims the Catholic Encyclopedia says:

"Various traditions represent him as the first Bishop of Milan, as preaching at Alexandria and at Rome, whose fourth (?) bishop, St. Clement, he is said to have converted, and as having suffered martyrdom in Cyprus. The traditions are all late and untrustworthy."

The article provides The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church as the source of its claim. Even if this source is exactly in agreement with the article, it is not a reliable source for something like this. The reliable source is the basis for the claim in The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church and that is not provided.

It does not appear that there is reliable information as to how or when Barnabas died and unless that kind of information can be found the article should be amended so that information about the death of Barnabas is identified as based on traditions as the Catholic Encyclopedia says.--Davefoc (talk) 18:38, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

  • Agreed. This unfounded claim stuck out to me, as well, and it's reflective of how a lot of religious traditions (particularly the Christian martyrdom claims) are put forward on Wikipedia as established historical facts. I revised the passage to read: "Although the date, place, and circumstances of his death are, as yet, historically unverifiable, Christian tradition holds that Barnabas was martyred at Salamis, Cyprus, in 61 CE." --Kglogauer (talk) 22:59, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
    • ^ Durant, Will. Caesar and Christ. New York: Simon and Schuster. 1972