The Epistle of Barnabas () is an early Christian Greek epistle written between 70 and 135 AD. The complete text is preserved in the 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus, where it is positioned at the end of the New Testament, following the Book of Revelation and preceding the Shepherd of Hermas.
For several centuries, the epistle was categorized among the "antilegomena" ("disputed writings"); while some early Christians regarded it as sacred scripture, others excluded it. Eusebius of Caesarea classified it with excluded texts. It is mentioned in a perhaps third-century list in the sixth century Codex Claromontanus and in the later Stichometry of Nicephorus appended to the ninth-century Chronography of Nikephoros I of Constantinople. Some early Fathers of the Church ascribed it to the Barnabas mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, but it is now generally attributed to an otherwise unknown early Christian teacher (though some scholars do defend the traditional attribution).J. B. Burger, "L'Enigme de Barnabas," pp. 180–193; and , The Apostolic Fathers, p. 44; et al. It is distinct from the Gospel of Barnabas.
The central message of the Epistle of Barnabas is that the writings comprising the Hebrew Bible—what would become the Old Testament of the Christian Bible—were, from even their times of authorship, written for use by Christians rather than the Israelites and, by extension, the Jews. According to the epistle, the Jews had misinterpreted their own law (i.e., halakha) by applying it literally; the true meaning was to be found in its symbolic prophecies foreshadowing the coming of Jesus of Nazareth, whom Christians believe to be the messiah. Furthermore, the author posits that the Judaizers were misled by an evil angel, as they were attempting to impose a literal circumcision on Christians. After explaining its Christian interpretations of the Jewish scriptures, the epistle concludes by discussing the "Two Ways", also seen in the Didache: a "Way of Light" and a "Way of Darkness".
Manuscript tradition The 4th-century Codex Sinaiticus (S), discovered by Constantin von Tischendorf in 1859 and published by him in 1862, contains a complete text of the Epistle placed after the canonical New Testament and followed by the Shepherd of Hermas. The 11th-century Codex Hierosolymitanus (H), which also includes the Didache, the two Epistles of Clement and the longer version of the Letters of Ignatius of Antioch, is another witness to the full text. It was discovered by Philotheos Bryennios at Constantinople in 1873 and published by him in 1875. Adolf Hilgenfeld used it for his 1877 edition of the Epistle of Barnabas. A family of 10 or 11 manuscripts dependent on the 11th-century Codex Vaticanus graecus 859 (G) contain chapters 5:7b−21:9 placed as a continuation of a truncated text of Polycarp's letter to the Philippians (1:1–9:2). An old Latin version (L), perhaps of no later than the end of the 4th century, that is preserved in a single 9th-century manuscript (St Petersburg, Q.v.I.39) gives the first 17 chapters (without the "Two Ways" section of chapters 18 to 21). This is a fairly literal rendering in general, but is sometimes significantly shorter than the Greek text. S and H generally agree on readings. G often agrees with L against S and H. A small papyrus fragment (PSI 757) of the third or fourth century has the first 6 verses of chapter 9, and there are a few fragments in Syriac of chapters 1, 19, 20. The writings of Clement of Alexandria give a few brief quotations, as to a smaller extent do Origen, Didymus the Blind and Jerome.James N. Rhodes, The Epistle of Barnabas and the Deuteronomic Tradition (Mohr Siebeck 2004), p. xii.Timothy B. Sailors, William Wright: A catalogue of the Syriac manuscripts preserved in the Library of the University of Cambridge (Vol. II). Cambridge: University Press (1901), p. 611.
Status for Christians
The Epistle was viewed as authoritative scripture by some Christians in the early centuries of church history.Lookadoo, The Epistle of Barnabas: A Commentary, 11. It was attributed to Barnabas, the companion of Paul the Apostle, by Clement of Alexandria (c. 150 – c. 215)Clement, Stromateis, 2.7, 2.20, 5.8, 5.10, 6.8. and Origen (c. 184 – c. 253).Origen, On First Principles, 3.2.4; Against Celsus, 1.63. Clement quotes it with phrases such as "the Apostle Barnabas says."Stromata, book 2, chapters 6, 7, 15, 18, 20. Origen speaks of it as "the General Epistle of Barnabas",Contra Celsum, book 1, chapter 63. a phrase usually associated with canonical non-Pauline epistles.
In the fourth century, the Epistle was also highly regarded by Didymus the Blind (c. 313 – c. 398),Didymus, Commentary on the Psalms, 300.12–13; Commentary on Zechariah, 234.21–22, 259.21–24, 355.20–24. Serapion of Thmuis (c. 290 – c. 358),Serapion, Concerning Father and Son, v. 5, cited in Bishop Serapion’s Prayer Book (1899), tr. George Wobbermin, ed. John Wordsworth, p. 94. and Jerome (c. 342–420)Jerome, De Viris Illustribus (Lives of Illustrious Men), 6. as an authentic work of the apostolic Barnabas. Its inclusion in close proximity to the New Testament writings in Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Claromontanus witnesses to the canonical or near-canonical authority it held for some Christians,Elliot, "Manuscripts, The Codex and the Canon," JSNT 63. though it is argued by some that this is evidence merely of its popularity and usefulness, not necessarily of canonicity.Andreas J. Köstenberger, Michael J. Kruger, The Heresy of Orthodoxy (Crossway 2010), p. 164
Eusebius (c. 260 – c. 340), in book three of his Church History, excluded it from "the accepted books", classifying it as among the "rejected" or "spurious" (νόθοι) writings,Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiasticus, 3.25.3–6. although he elsewhere included this same Epistle of Barnabas with Hebrews and Jude in the category of "disputed scriptures" (ἀντιλεγομένων γραφῶν).Eusebius, Historia Ecclesiasticus, 6.13.6; (cf. 6.14.1). "He makes use also in these works of testimonies from the disputed Scriptures...the Epistle to the Hebrews, and those of Barnabas, and Clement and Jude."
In the sixth century, Codex Claromontanus (a list of Old Testament and New Testament books, dating from the third or fourth century) includes the Epistle of Barnabas between Jude and Revelation along with the Shepherd of Hermas, the Acts of Paul and the Apocalypse of Peter.Catalogue inserted in Codex Claromontanus.Stichometric list in Codex Claromontanus (about A.D. 400) Next to the listing of Barnabas is a dash (most likely added some time later)Hixson (et al.), Myths and Mistakes in New Testament Textual Criticism, 257. that may indicate doubtful or disputed canonicity, though the same marking is found next to 1 Peter as well, so its meaning is unclear.GA 06 (Dp), Bibliothèque nationale de France: Claromontanus (c. 550 AD), folio 468.
The Stichometry of Nicephorus, a later list of uncertain date appended to the Chronography of the early 9th century Nikephoros I of Constantinople, puts the Epistle of Barnabas among its four "disputed" New Testament works—along with the Book of Revelation, the Revelation of Peter and the Gospel of the Hebrews—but not among its seven "New Testament apocrypha".The Stichometery of Nicephorus (9th century?).Erwin Preuschen, Analecta (1893), pp. 157−158.
Date of composition In 16.3–4, the Epistle of Barnabas reads:
As commonly interpreted, this passage places the Epistle after the destruction of the Second Temple in AD 70. It also places the Epistle before the Bar Kokhba revolt of AD 132, after which there could have been no hope that the Romans would help to rebuild the temple. The document must therefore come from the period between the two Jewish revolts. Attempts at identifying a more precise date are conjectures. The Encyclopædia Britannica puts the latest possible date at AD 130, and gives the actual date of composition at "circa AD 100". Its 1911 edition opted strongly for "the reign of Vespasian (AD 70–79)", shortly after the Catholic Encyclopedia had preferred AD 130−131 in an article by Paulin Ladeuze, and AD 96−98 in an article by John Bertram Peterson. On a more precise dating within the limits associated with the Jerusalem temple there is thus an "absence of scholarly consensus".Johannes Quasten, Patrology (Christian Classics) vol. 1, p. 90.
Jay Curry Treat comments on the absence in the Epistle of Barnabas (except for a possible reference to the phrase "Many are called, but few are chosen" in the Gospel according to Matthew) of citations from the New Testament:
J. E. Jacquier on different opinion, pointing to the fact that the reference to Matthew 22:14 is proceeded by the words "as the scripture says" (os gegraptai) which not only shows that the words are a quotation but according to him "proves that the author considered the Gospel of Matthew equal in point of authority to the writings of the Old Testament".
Helmut Koester considers the Epistle to be earlier than the Gospel of Matthew: in his Introduction to the New Testament he says of the author of the Epistle: "It cannot be shown that he knew and used the Gospels of the New Testament. On the contrary, what Barnabas presents here is from 'the school of the evangelists'. This demonstrates how the early Christian communities paid special attention to the exploration of Scripture in order to understand and tell the suffering of Jesus. Barnabas still represents the initial stages of the process that is continued in the Gospel of Peter, later in Matthew, and is completed in Justin Martyr."Helmut Koester, Introduction to the New Testament (Walter de Gruyter 1995), vol. 2, p. 281; original: Helmut Köster, Einführung in das Neue Testament im Rahmen der Religionsgeschichte und Kulturgeschichte der hellenistischen und römischen Zeit (Walter de Gruyter 1980), p. 716.
John Finnis has recently argued that the Epistle may have been written around the year 40 AD, proposing that chapter 16 refers instead to the destruction of the First Temple in 587 BC.
An opposing view is enunciated by Everett Ferguson: "The language of rebuilding the temple in 16.3–5 refers to the spiritual temple of the heart of Gentile believers (any allusion to a physical temple in Jerusalem is doubtful)." On the date of composition he says: "The Epistle of Barnabas is usually dated to 130−135, although an earlier date in the late 70s has had its champions, and 96−98 is a possibility."
Provenance
The place of origin is generally taken to be Alexandria in Egypt. It is first attested there (by Clement of Alexandria). Its allegorical style points to Alexandria. Barnabas 9:6 mentions idol-worshipping priests as circumcised, a practice in use in Egypt. However, some scholars have suggested an origin in Syria or Asia Minor.Johannes Quasten, Patrology (Christian Classics) vol. 1, p. 89.Aune (2003), p. 72.
Treat comments on the provenance of the Epistle of Barnabas:Jay Curry Treat in The Anchor Bible Dictionary (1992) v. 1, p. 613.
Contents The Epistle of Barnabas has the form not so much of a letter (it lacks indication of identity of sender and addressees), but as of a treatise. In this, it is like the Epistle to the Hebrews, which Tertullian ascribed to the apostle BarnabasF. F. Bruce, The Epistle to the Hebrews (Eerdmans 1990), p. 16. and with which it has "a large amount of superficial resemblance".H. H. B. Ayles, Destination, Date, and Authorship of the Epistle to the Hebrews (Cambridge University Press 1899), p. 150. On the other hand, it does have some features of an epistolary character,James Carleton Paget, The Epistle of Barnabas: Outlook and Background (Mohr Siebeck 1994), p. 45. and Reidar Hvalvik argues that it is in fact a letter.Reidar Hvalvik, The Struggle for Scripture and Covenant: The Purpose of the Epistle of Barnabas and Jewish-Christian Competition in the Second Century (Mohr Siebeck 1996), pp. 71−75.