Talk:Epistle of Barnabas

Christianity Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Christianity 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.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religious texts (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religious texts, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.

Catholicism Low‑importance

	Epistle of Barnabas is within the scope of WikiProject Catholicism, an attempt to better organize and improve the quality of information in articles related to the Catholic Church. For more information, visit the project page.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Catholicism task list: edit history watch purge Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Article requests : see Draft articles Assess : see Category:Unassessed Catholicism articles; Category:Unknown-importance Catholicism articles Cleanup : Blessed Virgin Mary (see the talk page) Collaborate : Invitation template needed, see Category:WikiProject invitation templates Copyedit : Cuthbert Tunstall Expand : Angelus; Roman Catholicism in Kosovo; Bishop Adolph John Paschang; Cum sæpe accidere; Altar Society; American Board of Catholic Missions; Bernard Häring NPOV : Americanism (heresy); Ensoulment Photo : see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs of Catholicism Stubs : see Category:Stub-Class Catholicism articles; Category:Catholic Church stubs Update : Peer review; John Aloysius Maguire Verify : Archdiocese of Glasgow; Archbishop of Westminster; Bishop; Saint Mungo; Sanctification; Westminster Cathedral Other : Watch recent changes for Catholicism articles

Books

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Books. To participate in the project, please visit its page, where you can join the project and discuss matters related to book articles. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the relevant guideline for the type of work.

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles 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.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

The Epistle of Barnabas should be put on the internet for free, and made easy to find. The Gospel of Barnabas is available that way, and many people I suspect mistake it for the the Epistle.

This anonymous reader has not looked through the article's External links. --Wetman 05:20, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

This page seems to be a testimony of the book's authenticity, although being disputed (no claim of authenticity dispute is noted here). --IronMaidenRocks (talk) 15:21, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Interesting article on the BBC[1] claims "Anti-Semitic writings... the Epistle of Barnabas. This goes out of its way to claim that it was the Jews, not the Romans, who killed Jesus, and is full of anti-Semitic kindling ready to be lit. 'His blood be upon us,' Barnabas has the Jews cry." and a quote from Professor Bart Ehrman "The suffering of Jews in the subsequent centuries would, if possible, have been even worse had the Epistle of Barnabas remained". 78.105.220.50 (talk) 15:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

I have owned two copies of The Apostolic Fathers, and the Epistle of Barnabas was in both of them. That's where the Epistle of Barnabas is found. Aragorn 05:23, 16 August 2019 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jkshrews (talk • contribs)

Part of Roman Catholic Canon?

I'm puzzled about the presence of these three navigation templates at the end of this article:

Since the Epistle of Barnabas does not appear to belong to the RC canon of the New Testament, why are these templates here? Thanks. --TraceyR (talk) 20:00, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Finnis source

@Potatín5: First, thanks for editing the other cites! And in general, adding in sourced journal stuff is cool.

That said... I think this might be UNDUE? The Journal of Theological Studies is Oxford's in-house arm, and John Finnis is an emeritus at Oxford. An emeritus publishing outside his area of expertise, too - he's obviously interested in a lot of stuff, but his main area of expertise is theoretically law. Nobody else argues for such an early date, and it doesn't make tons of sense - if it was written between 30-70, why would the rebuilding of the Temple be put in the future tense? The Second Temple would have been right there. Along with the million and one reasons to place this in later Christianity rather than the earliest Christianity. I think this source is sufficiently off the rails that we just shouldn't include it at all. (But... don't want to make it seem like I'm defending the current state of the article, if you're interested in adding sources it'd be great! Just... not this one. ;-) ) Any thoughts? SnowFire (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2024 (UTC)

@SnowFire: Thanks for your comment. I didn't know about who John Finnis was, but I was impressed after reading his article as he makes a very detailed case for his thesis. He also makes a case for understanding the reference to the rebuilding of the Temple as a vaticinium ex eventu description of Zerubabbel's reconstruction of the Temple of Jerusalem. I don't know if my addition of Finnis' article is UNDUE; I personally think of it as a piece of recent scholarship reassessing prior work on the topic. It was also published in a very prestigious, peer-reviewed academic journal published by Oxford University Press. That said, I don't know if that is sufficient to establish his theory as significant enough to deserve a mention in Wikipedia. What is your opinion about this? Potatín5 (talk) 21:56, 27 May 2024 (UTC)