Christianity and Islam V, On the Gospel of the Nazorenes

A Muslim friend quoted a little know (among Christians) gospel called the Gospel of the Nazorenes to refute the teaching of Paul on Blood atonement. What follows is part of my reply to him.

Friend Z, wrote: "Jesus was teaching his disciples in the outer court of the Temple and one of them said unto him: Master, it is said by the priests that without shedding of blood there is no remission. Can then the blood offering of the law take away sin? And Jesus answered: No blood offering, of beast or bird, or man, can take away sin, for how can the conscience be purged from sin by the shedding of innocent blood? Nay, it will increase the condemnation. (Gospel of the Nazorenes, Lection 33, verses 1-2)."

Permit me to say that we Christians absolutely do not accept the Gospel of the Nazorenes as being canonical. It does not exist except in various references to it by certain writers such as Jerome (5th century). It is not referenced nor mentioned by the Apostolic Fathers (second and third centuries). It did not appear in the list of books contending for canonicity. Clearly, it was (if it ever existed at all) a Christian apocrypha (writings, statements, etc., of doubtful authorship or authenticity) work.

Having said that, let us look at the quote that was given from it. According to my friend the GN has Jesus saying, "No blood offering, of ... man, can take away sin, for how can the conscience be purged from sin by the shedding of innocent blood?" In the courtroom of logic and commonsense this statement is just too convenient of an attack on the writings of Paul, and, as such demonstrates a post-Pauline origin. This sort of stuff smacks of the type of false writings that include the Gospel of Barnabas — which the whole world knows to be a fake. Secondly, it is opposed to the teaching of Jesus on blood atonement: Jesus said in Matthew's Gospel, “... this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” (Matthew 26:28.) This is the Bible, of which Muhammed said was the Word of Allah. Of course Muhammed being illiterate, did not know what the Bible actually said. Had he known he would not have pretended that his acceptance of the Jewish and Christian holy books was a revelation from Allah.

Apostolically Speaking,
☩ Jerry L Hayes