1500 Year Old Bible Confirms That Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified


Much to the dismay of the Vatican, an approx. 1500-2000 year old bible was found in Turkey, in the Ethnography Museum of Ankara. Discovered and kept secret in the year 2000, the book contains the Gospel of Barnabas – a disciple of Christ – which shows that Jesus was not crucified, nor was he the son of God, but a Prophet. The book also calls Apostle Paul “The Impostor”. The book also claims that Jesus ascended to heaven alive, and that Judas Iscariot was crucified in his place.

A report by The National Turk says that the Bible was seized from a gang of smugglers in a Mediterranean-area operation. The report states the gang was charged with smuggling antiquities, illegal excavations, and the possession of explosives. The books itself is valued as high as 40 Million Turkish Liras (approx. 28 mil. Dollars). Man, where is the Thieves Guild, when you need them?

According to reports, experts and religious authorities in Tehram insist that the book is original. The book itself is written with gold lettering, onto loosely-tied leather in Aramaic, the language of Jesus Christ. The text maintains a vision similar to Islam, contradicting the New Testament’s teachings of Christianity. Jesus also foresees the coming of the Prophet Muhammad, who would found Islam 700 years later.

It is believed that, during the Council of Nicea, the Catholic Church hand-picked the gospels that form the Bible as we know it today; omitting the Gospel of Barnabas (among many others) in favor of the four canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Many biblical texts have begun to surface over time, including those of the Dead Sea and Gnostic Gospels; but this book especially, seems to worry the Vatican.

What does this mean to Christian-derived religions and their followers? Quite a tight spot. The Vatican has asked Turkish authorities to let them examine the contents of the book within the Church. Now that the book has been found, will they come to accept the it and its evidence? Will they deny it altogether?

Call it a “Muslim lie”, as did the “Truth” Magazine, in 2000? To many, this book is a beacon of hope, that believers soon realize that the object of their adoration is arbitrary; and that all text, especially religious text, is subject to interpretation.

What does this mean to atheists/agnostics/secular thinkers? Not much… Is the text real? Fake? Does it matter? Not really… But hopefully, this news inspires the religious to ask questions, instead of pointing fingers or believing anything blindly. Please, don’t go poking fun or tossing around the “I told you so!”s.

The biggest danger of faith is when people believe what they want to believe, defending against any and all evidence; especially when that evidence revolutionizes their foundation from the ground up.

And the biggest culprit to that danger is the ego trap: rejecting/criticizing others, for being unlike you.For centuries, the “defense” of blind faith has driven nations to war, violence, discrimination, slavery and to become the society of automatons that we are today; and for just as long, it has been justified with lies. If you know better, act like it.

Click to WATCH: 1500 Year Old Bible Confirms That Jesus Christ Was Not Crucified



  1. Looks like a glue 19th century binding to me. Don’t think they had that ability back then. It just looks to modern. If they had this kind of technology back then? I think we would see dozens of these and other books all over the place.

  2. Dennis P Ginther, Continue To Question, what others call Real, True or Fact. As in Ancient Times, those people were capable of being fooled, and Today because of all this hidden information, only enjoyed by Elite groups who share not old secrets outside their circles, we are as easily fooled, as people of old, due to lack of real knowledge, never the less, our common sense can carry us through the lies and towards THE TRUTH, If this be in our will to perform. Over All, in the end, all that matters, is who is GOOD, and who is EVIL, for there no one shall be no in between.

  3. I would be interested in how they determined the age of this book. Very few actual facts in this article. Anything that would raise questions against the steadfast dogma of any religion is a good thing. Think for yourselves and question authority!

  4. Bottom line…They are all ‘written’ by man.After the fact/s..And then again..Edited by man…Culled, edited, abridged, re arranged, interpreted and scribed…By man…Hmmm..

  5. The very first test should be to authenticate the object regarding age. Then let the scholars attempt to determine the most accurate translation. Remember, the dead sea scrolls, discovered in 1948, have been the object of nearly seventy years of dispute regarding translation. We can only guess when this latest bit of history will be reliably interpreted.

  6. I trust the GOD who made heaven and earth ,and all that in it to provide information he deem important to those he desire,yes is foe will seek otherwise.But don’t you think good would overcome evil in the end.If your faith brings out the best in you ,you need not worry,GOD will do the rest,that is necessary to reconcile the difference.

  7. The “book” contains the Gospel of Barnabas? And it is dated prior to 500 A.D. Sorry – but I’m going to call BS on this. The Gospel of Barnabas is is a proven forgery from the 14th… probably the 15th century. A simple google or Bing search would provide many primary sourced documents demonstrating this. So — this is a bunch of crap!!! A lie told Muslims trying to promote a prophet who made his religion up!!!

  8. Wow… Ok, old book, 500 years after the fact. Doesn’t make it scripture or authoritative. Its a physical book, you can put anything in it or take it out. We’ve got far earlier bible codices with books in them that weren’t considered scripture even by their compilers. If we found some early quotations of church fathers or councils of the gospel of Barnabas (different than the epistle) then maybe it would have some weight compared to say the Nag hammadi finds which some were referenced. But it’s laughable that this existed anywhere near the writing of the NT. And Nicea had nothing to do with establishing the canon of scripture. You can read what they did discuss in actual history books, and some primary sources if you put down the Dan Brown novels. 😛


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here