Too lazy to read? Watch the video!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6bGuKmFWF8
Introduction to the
Letter of Barnabas
Post-Apostolic Church
I would like to begin with my conclusions
about the Letter of Barnabas. It is my
opinion that the Letter of Barnabas was written around 130 AD by a Barnabas of
Alexandria. However, this video will also include the support for Barnabas
the Apostle having been the author.
The Letter of Barnabas is one of the three works that were almost
included in the New Testament canon. The
other two were 1 Clement and the Shepherd of Hermas. Since there is a debate over whether this
letter is Scripture or not, this video will share much more detail about this
work.
AUTHOR
This letter bears the name of Barnabas, not within
the letter itself, but in the title of the ancient copies we have. Was the letter written by Barnabas who was an
apostle according to Acts 4:36, 14:14?
Clement of Alexandria believed so and called
him an apostle four times. (He also
quoted the Letter of Barnabas about 8 times.)
Now, if you are familiar
with Clement of Alexandria, this is not surprising. Far more than any other Pre-Nicene Christian
writer, Clement was very quick to accept various books as Scripture. Clement of Alexandria
What about other Pre-Nicene writers? Tertullian mentions both Barnabas and the
Letter of Barnabas. He says,
"...Barnabas--a
man sufficiently accredited by God, as being one whom Paul had stationed next
to himself in the uninterrupted observance of abstinence. [Paul wrote,] 'Or else, I alone and Barnabas,
have not we the power of working?' [cf. 1Cor 9:6] And, of course, the Letter of Barnabas is
more generally received among the Churches than that apocryphal 'Shepherd' of
adulterers." (Tertullian. AD 212.
ANF, vol 4, page 97.)
Tertullian doesn't
say explicitly, but he implies that the Letter of Barnabas was written by
Barnabas the apostle. About the Letter
of Barnabas itself, Tertullian doesn't give us any more information.
[The
first-century work called the Didache is very similar to the Letter of
Barnabas. If the Letter of Barnabas was
written by Barnabas the apostle, then the Didache probably took some material
from Barnabas. But if the Letter of
Barnabas was written by another Barnabas, then Barnabas took some material from
the Didache. Because of their similarity,
the Didache and the Letter of Barnabas were written about the same time.]
No other Pre-Nicene
writer quotes from or even mentions the Letter of Barnabas. Eusebius, who wrote soon after the Council of Nicaea, included the Letter of
Barnabas in the disputed or rejected books (Eusebius. Ecclesiastical History, book 3, chapter 25,
paragraph 4.). On the other hand, Jerome, Eusebius' son, believed it was written
by Barnabas the apostle (Jerome. Lives
of Illustrious Men, chapter 6.).
Because the work appears to have initially become
popular in Alexandria and because Clement of
Alexandria was the first to refer to the letter, many scholars believe it was
written in Alexandria Alexandria
Barnabas' Old Testament quotations are very
odd. Unlike most Pre-Nicene writers,
many of his quotations do not follow Scripture word-for-word. He also quotes some passages that are not
found in any known Scripture. This does
not seem like something Barnabas the Apostle would do. This will be discussed in more detail later.
This
work was written by a Barnabas, but the question remains: which one? Because of this controversy as to the author,
the Letter of Barnabas was not considered Scripture. Perhaps studying the letter from other angles
will shed more light on this.
DATE
The best way to determine the author and
date of a book is to look at the internal evidence. As for the author, there is no internal evidence
as to who Barnabas is. But there is some
internal evidence for the date.
The letter reads:
"Therefore He
[the Lord] has circumcised our ears, that we might hear His word and believe,
for the circumcision in which they [the Jews] trusted is abolished." (Letter of Barnabas. AD 130.
ANF, vol 1, page 142.)
Is
Barnabas talking about circumcision being abolished under the New Testament? This might be more likely. But Barnabas could be referring to the
abolition of circumcision under the Roman Empire . Emperor Hadrian abolished circumcision--calling it barbaric--around 130 AD
which contributed to the Third
Roman-Jewish War (also called the Bar Kokhba Revolt) about two years later. Could Barnabas be referring to this abolition
of circumcision? If so, the Letter of
Barnabas would have been written soon after 130 AD.
Some scholars date the letter as early as
96-98 AD. But even this is too late for
it to be authored by Barnabas the apostle who, according to tradition, died
around 60 AD. In fact, the author says
that the destruction of the temple--which occurred in 70 AD--happened before
his letter.
"I will also
tell you concerning the temple, how the wretched [Jews], wandering in error,
trusted not in God Himself, but in the temple, as being the house of God. For almost after the manner of the Gentiles
they worshipped Him in the temple. But
learn how the Lord speaks when abolishing it... 'Behold, they who have cast
down this temple, even they shall build it up again' [Is 49:17]. It has happened." (Letter of Barnabas. AD 130.
ANF, vol 1, page 147.)
The temple was built again by Hadrian around
130 AD. So it is possible that the
letter was written after 130 AD. And the
letter was certainly written after the temple's destruction in 70 AD. Unless Barnabas the apostle lived into the
70s, this letter could not have been written by him.
Though it seems more likely that the letter
was written in the second century, the work was written very, very early in
Christian history. But the question
remains: when exactly? After spending
over 10 hours researching the author and the date, it is my opinion that the Letter of Barnabas was written by a
Barnabas of Alexandria around or after 130 AD.
CONTENT
What about the letter's content? Barnabas is quite insightful and reveals some
obscure patterns between the Old Testament and the New Testament. Perhaps he even reads too deeply into the
Scriptures, drawing meanings that may not have been intended.
In this first example, Barnabas gives a reason
why Moses commanded the Israelites not to eat swine.
"For this
reason, he [Moses] named the swine, as much as to say, 'You shall not join
yourself to men who resemble swine.' For
when they live in pleasure, they forget their Lord; but when they come to want,
they acknowledge the Lord. And the
swine, when it has eaten, does not recognize its master; but when hungry, it
cries out, and on receiving food is quiet again." (Letter of Barnabas. AD 130.
ANF, vol 1, page 143.)
Second, Barnabas gives a reason why Moses
commanded the Israelites not to eat certain birds.
"He [Moses]
says, 'Neither shall you eat the eagle, the hawk, the kite, nor the raven' [Lev
11:13ff, Deut 14:12ff]. He means, 'You
shall not join yourself to such men who do not know how to obtain food for
themselves by labor and sweat but seize the things of others in their sins, and
although wearing an aspect of simplicity, are on the watch to plunder
others.' So these birds, while they sit
idle, inquire how they may devour the flesh of others, proving themselves pests
by their wickedness." (Letter of
Barnabas. AD 130. ANF, vol 1, page 143.)
As mentioned before, Barnabas' use of
Scripture is not word-for-word. I have
taken all of his quotes of Scripture and put them into four categories: direct
quotes, slightly different quotes, very different quotes, and quotes that are
not found in any religious document known to either Jews or Christians.
To be
fair to the author, it does not look like he intended to write exact quotations. For example in chapter 6, Barnabas quotes Gen
1:28 twice, but he does not quote it the same way both times. It seems that he is often quoting Scripture
from memory. So it is easy to show mercy
regarding the verses that are slightly different.
However,
the proportion of quotations that are very different or not even found in
Scripture is unreasonably high if the Letter of Barnabas itself is to be
considered Scripture. Because of these
two categories, the letter does not seem like the work of Barnabas the Apostle
who had gifts of the Holy Spirit.
One of the verses that is very different
from Scripture is from Ex 20:8 about keeping the Sabbath Holy.
"It is written
concerning the Sabbath in the Decalogue [that is, the Ten Commandments] which [the
Lord] spoke, face to face, to Moses on Mount Sinai ,
'And sanctify the Sabbath of the Lord with clean hands and a pure heart.'
" (Letter of Barnabas. AD 130.
ANF, vol 1, page 146.)
Not
only is Barnabas' quotation very different as he adds a completely new phrase
at the end, but this is one of the Ten Commandments; and he is aware of this! To quote one of the Ten Commandments so
differently suggests that Barnabas the Apostle is not the author.
Of the quotes not found in Scripture, one of
these quotations is attributed to Jesus.
"He [Jesus]
says, 'Those who wish to behold Me, and lay hold of My kingdom, must obtain Me
through tribulation and suffering.' "
(Letter of Barnabas. AD 130. ANF, vol 1, page 142.)
This
sounds like something Jesus taught, but these words are not found in our Scriptures.
ERRORS
There are three big reasons why I do not
believe this work was written by Barnabas the Apostle. There are four errors in this letter.
First, Barnabas spends much time on an Old
Testament command regarding the goat that was to be sent out into the
wilderness. This is found in Lev 16:7-10
where Aaron is instructed to take the goat of the Lord and sacrifice it as a
burnt offering. A man was to lead the
other goat out into the wilderness for Azazel.
However, Barnabas says that before the goat was lead into the
wilderness, the people spat on it, pierced it, and wrapped its head with red
wool. This is not mentioned in Scripture
or in any Jewish writing we have today.
Scholars believe this was a Jewish custom of the first century, but we
don't know for sure. In any case,
Barnabas explains this treatment of the goat as if Moses commanded it, which
Moses did not.
Second, Barnabas says this about the hyena.
"Moreover, 'You
shall not eat the hyena.' He [Moses]
means, 'You shall not be an adulterer, a corrupter [of boys], nor be like them
that are such.' Why? Because that animal annually changes its sex,
and is at one time male, and at another female." (Letter of Barnabas. AD 130.
ANF, vol 1, page 143.)
Modern
science has concluded that hyenas do not change sex. But it is admitted that a hyena's genitals
are very difficult to distinguish. Was
there a hyena in Barnabas' day that changed sex from year to year? Perhaps, but there is no evidence to this at
all.
Third, Barnabas says this about the weasel.
"Moreover, he
[Moses] has rightly detested the weasel.
For he means, 'You shall not be like those whom we hear of that commit
wickedness with the mouth, on account of their uncleanness. Nor shall you be joined to those impure women
who commit iniquity with the mouth. For
this animal conceives by the mouth.' "
(Letter of Barnabas. AD 130. ANF, vol 1, page 143.)
The
belief that weasels conceive through their mouths is a myth dating back many
centuries. One of the earliest references to this idea is in the book,
The Metamorphoses, by the Roman poet Ovid in 8 AD. In it, the mortal Galanthis defied some of
the gods by allowing Hercules to be born.
In retaliation, she was turned into a weasel. In the early seventh century, Isidore, archbishop of Seville , Spain
Fourth, Barnabas uses a few Hebrew letters
and denotes their numeric equivalents.
"[Scripture] says, 'And Abraham
circumcised ten, and eight, and three hundred men of his household' [Gen 14:14,
17:26-27]. What, then, was the knowledge
given to him in this? Learn the eighteen
first, and then the three hundred. The
ten and the eight are thus denoted: Ten by Ι, and Eight by Η. You have [the initials of the name of] Jesus. And because the cross was to express the grace
[of our redemption] by the letter Τ, he says also, 'Three Hundred.' He signifies, therefore, Jesus by two letters,
and the cross by one." (Letter of
Barnabas. AD 130. ANF, vol 1, page 143.)
When he
says I, Yod, is 10 and H, Heth, is 8, he is correct. When he says these are the initials of the
name of Jesus, Yeshua, he is correct.
However, T, Tav, is not 300 but 400.
The letter S, Shin, is 300. So in
Barnabas' explanation, if we were to take the letter T, we would get 418, not
318. If we were to take the letter S, we
would not get the symbol of the cross.
Though Barnabas' effort to tie Abraham's circumcision to his 318
servants is insightful, it is not completely accurate.
*** UPDATE ***
I wrote the paragraph above using the Hebrew (Gematria). However, if one uses the Greek (Isopsephy), which makes
more sense because the letter was written in Greek, then the Greek letter T is
300. This means there is NO ERROR in
what Barnabas is saying here. He is accurate. Tau / T (300) + Iota / I (10) + Eta / H (8) =
318
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, was the Letter of Barnabas
written by Barnabas the apostle? It
appears that this is not the case. Does
the Letter of Barnabas have value for the church? It certainly does. It takes extra effort to follow Barnabas of
Alexandria's very unique mind and the mysteries he reveals. But the Letter of Barnabas is worth the read.
No comments:
Post a Comment